Le 05/04/2011 07:41, Amir E. Aharoni a écrit :
> That's the problem with grants, i guess. If a rich - and certainly
> well-meaning - foundation invests money in a Big Project that doesn't
> hurt free knowledge, but doesn't advance it too much either, it's not
> a big problem by itself.
Indeed! Vect
2011/4/4 Rodan Bury :
> As for the quantitative analysis, the one made during the beta testing of
> Vector was detailed. It clearly showed that most users - and especially
> newbies - preferred Vector over Monobook (retention rates of 70 - 80 % and
> more).
It means that for most people Vector was
In nothing more then unscientific 'hand my laptop over to a friend, wait,
switch themes, wait, ask opinions', repeated with 11 guinea pigs (i mean
friends), it came out a wash. After 15 minutes in each theme, it was close
to a split. 7 said they preferred monobook, 4 vector. When asked to compare
v
2011/4/4 Amir E. Aharoni :
> For example, in the Hebrew Wikipedia there was a Search and Replace
> gadget long before the advent of Vector's Search and Replace dialog.
> It was developed due to popular demand, bottom-up, by a volunteer, and
> - here's the scariest part - without any grants. It is s
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 22:14, Erik Moeller wrote:
> 2011/4/4 Rodan Bury :
>> As Erik Möller said the qualitative analysis is the user testing with a few
>> dozens of users. This user testing was conducted several times during the
>> development cycle, and it was thorough. The best user testing con
2011/4/4 Rodan Bury :
> As Erik Möller said the qualitative analysis is the user testing with a few
> dozens of users. This user testing was conducted several times during the
> development cycle, and it was thorough. The best user testing consist of no
> more than 30 users, and I can tell the user
2011/4/4 Amir E. Aharoni
> 2011/4/4 David Gerard
> >
> > On 4 April 2011 16:20, Amir E. Aharoni
> wrote:
> >
> > > I understand that WMF's resources are limited, but the development and
> > > the deployment of Vector did cost some money and also forced a lot of
> > > volunteers in English and i
On 4 April 2011 17:20, FT2 wrote:
> I'm not seeing discussion of "chronically broken" code there. Just
> discussion of redundant code (due to 1.17) and cleanup. Any chance of a
> pointer to something that sums up the "chronically broken" nature of site
> script?
e.g.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/
I'm not seeing discussion of "chronically broken" code there. Just
discussion of redundant code (due to 1.17) and cleanup. Any chance of a
pointer to something that sums up the "chronically broken" nature of site
script?
FT2
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:41 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> On 4 April 2011
2011/4/4 David Gerard
>
> On 4 April 2011 16:20, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
>
> > I understand that WMF's resources are limited, but the development and
> > the deployment of Vector did cost some money and also forced a lot of
> > volunteers in English and in all other language projects to make
> > a
On 4 April 2011 16:33, FT2 wrote:
> Thread title?
"Focus on sister projects". Lots of the archive page as of today:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-April/
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Uns
Thread title?
FT2
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:27 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> See the current thread on wikitech-l about how chronically broken
> most site JavaScript is and what to do about the problem
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wi
On 4 April 2011 16:20, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
> I understand that WMF's resources are limited, but the development and
> the deployment of Vector did cost some money and also forced a lot of
> volunteers in English and in all other language projects to make
> adjustments to their sites. Measuring
2011/4/2 Rodan Bury :
> The analysis of the qualitative and quantitative results of the Usability
> Initiative is not a question anybody can answer. Comments like "I personally
> prefer monobook" (fictional example) does not help to make an analysis based
> on facts.
>
> Erik Möller's answer is pro
The analysis of the qualitative and quantitative results of the Usability
Initiative is not a question anybody can answer. Comments like "I personally
prefer monobook" (fictional example) does not help to make an analysis based
on facts.
Erik Möller's answer is professional and detailed in this re
On 04/01/11 8:29 AM, Sarah wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 09:10, David Gerard wrote:
>> I've been using it on our work intranet for new wikis. It's gained
>> unsolicited positive comment. Vector looks nice.
> Do we know how many editors still use Monobook?
I still use Classic, with Cologne Blue
I'd like a vector-monobook hybrid.
I miss the boxes in the sidebar, the size and color of the old logo
and the footer of Monobook.
I hate the star as watch icon, it should be an eye.
--
Fajro
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia
I do, but that's mostly because I like a data-dense interface and smaller
font, and probably because I'm comfortable enough with it not to need to
change personally. Then again I like classic menu on Windows too.
It's quite likely that most people we want to attract would like a more
modern style
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 09:10, David Gerard wrote:
> I've been using it on our work intranet for new wikis. It's gained
> unsolicited positive comment. Vector looks nice.
>
Do we know how many editors still use Monobook?
Sarah
___
foundation-l mailing
On 1 April 2011 15:46, Hydriz Wikipedia wrote:
> Well, I am very sure I joined Wikimedia due to the change in skin and liked
> the new skin as compared to Monobook.
I've been using it on our work intranet for new wikis. It's gained
unsolicited positive comment. Vector looks nice.
- d.
_
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Vector, a year after
>
> 2011/3/31 Amir E. Aharoni :
> > The Vector skin, the main product of the Usability Initiative, was
> > deployed on Wikimedia projects in April 2010.
> >
> > Quoting usability.wikimedia.org: "The goal of th
2011/3/31 Amir E. Aharoni :
> The Vector skin, the main product of the Usability Initiative, was
> deployed on Wikimedia projects in April 2010.
>
> Quoting usability.wikimedia.org: "The goal of this initiative is to
> measurably increase the usability of Wikipedia for new contributors by
> improvi
On 31 March 2011 22:35, Lodewijk wrote:
> I did a preliminary measure, and it actually showed a decline, starting the
> exact week it was implemented on nlwiki :( However, this preliminary measure
> was unscientific, not precise and would need better testing/measuring.
An immeadiate decline isn't
I did a preliminary measure, and it actually showed a decline, starting the
exact week it was implemented on nlwiki :( However, this preliminary measure
was unscientific, not precise and would need better testing/measuring.
Lodewijk
2011/3/31 Amir E. Aharoni
> The Vector skin, the main product
The Vector skin, the main product of the Usability Initiative, was
deployed on Wikimedia projects in April 2010.
Quoting usability.wikimedia.org: "The goal of this initiative is to
measurably increase the usability of Wikipedia for new contributors by
improving the underlying software on the basis
25 matches
Mail list logo
