OLPC talk:Wiki: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:57, 2 August 2007

?

1. Wiki on a server

  .Server.  [ ---- Internet ]
  / / | \ \ 
  1 2 3 4 5    (support editing directly on a server.  issues: edit conflicts, bw)

2. Wiki on a mesh

   Server [ ---- Internet ] (direct editing of a server-based wiki)
     |
   __XO__      (shared net connection)
  /      \
  |      |
 / \    / \  
-1-2 .. N-M-   (support machine-to-machine editing with a mesh portal.  issues: portal vis)

3. Wiki locally / offline

(. . . .)
| | | | |
1 2 3 4 5  (... connect to server or web infrequently)

interwiki map

I think it should be kept 'small' the map... too many inter-wikis and we'll probably no use them. Also adding specific olpc related wikis (like Nepal's, Tuquito, or similar) should be added. 2cts --Xavi 11:32, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

extensions

parser extensions (or rather the ability to do 'if') in some templates would probably simplify and enhance the use of it. Possible collateral damage is making it to cryptic. --Xavi 11:32, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

language

I saw in the special pages, the Special:Withoutinterwiki (labeled 'Pages without language links'). I tried a bit but couldn't get it to work... --Xavi 11:32, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

Shiki_Wiki link colors

The Shiki_Wiki skin, now the default, currently shows "seen" links as gray. This makes them very hard to scan for, as they blend in with the black text. The blue "unseen" links are ok, but once you have seen an article, its links disappear. Since link following is currently our main navigational technique, especially with Search being broken, this seems a very bad thing. Why are we using a non-standard link color anyway? Visual design should make the user experience easier and more pleasant, not cognitively harder. I strongly suggest reverting to browser link coloring. MitchellNCharity 15:12, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

You also now can't tell, based on link color, whether a discussion page exists or not. So you have to hover the mouse, and look to see if the url ends in edit. (observation by Xavi) MitchellNCharity 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

This shows up clearly on my monitors -- the gray vs blue for links and the gray vs white for existing vs empty talk pages. talk to the creator to get the colors changed! you can change your own back to monobook, of course, but better to get the skin fixed.... 59.112.162.93 16:57, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 19:43, 2 August 2007 (view source) MitchellNCharity (talk \| contribs) (→‎Shiki_Wiki link colors) ← Older edit		Revision as of 20:57, 2 August 2007 (view source) 59.112.162.93 (talk) (→‎Shiki_Wiki link colors) Newer edit →
Line 45:		Line 45:

	You also now can't tell, based on link color, whether a discussion page exists or not. So you have to hover the mouse, and look to see if the url ends in edit. (observation by Xavi) [[User:MitchellNCharity\|MitchellNCharity]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)		You also now can't tell, based on link color, whether a discussion page exists or not. So you have to hover the mouse, and look to see if the url ends in edit. (observation by Xavi) [[User:MitchellNCharity\|MitchellNCharity]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)
			: This shows up clearly on my monitors -- the gray vs blue for links and the gray vs white for existing vs empty talk pages. talk to the creator to get the colors changed! you can change your own back to monobook, of course, but better to get the skin fixed.... [[User:59.112.162.93\|59.112.162.93]] 16:57, 2 August 2007 (EDT)