Talk:Wizard (front end)

This is a really nice concept for the FEs. The FAQs seem general and might want to be put under a template (or another page entirely). Although it is useful information, it is not specific to the Wizard FE. With the drop-down style, some of the internal linking doesn't work very well (for example, Highlighting Strings internal link works, but if everything is not expanded, it appears to do nothing). I would also think for the instructions on downloading it, explicit links would be helpful. In particular, for third-party FEs, one should certainly provide links, thus this would be a general point for consistency. As for the Wizard screen itself, I might mention that it is very easy to arrange the different components (windows, icons), and that the real-estate for the different parts are small. In the past (maybe still) Avalon had each icon as a window with a header and a close/minimize button which wasted up a lot of space. In Storm Front, the user does not have nearly as much freedom to arrange different components of the window. They can even be made to be overlapping and I believe easily re-sized. I think the Wizard can also over-ride OS keybindings, like "Alt+Tab" etc; if this is still true today (I thought it was a setting of some sort to toggle), make sure it is mentioned (perhaps I just missed it). Finally, I would mention something about stamina, since I didn't think the Wizard was updated to show this status (or it's been updated and I haven't used the Wizard in years). Anyway, I think the style and approach are great, and the above are just a couple nit-picking points you may address. DAID (talk) 04:07, 29 March 2015 (CDT)

Thanks for the suggestions, Daid. When you say internal link not working, I take it you mean when linking the section in another article for reference? A couple quick tests confirms your perspective - I'll have to work on that, but need a way to detect the link includes the toggle command when the page is called - yay, another challenge! As to the other points, will work on them - right after I decide how best to meet some of the challenges I was handed (expanding the whole text, etc - which the link heads off to as a demo, right now. Will have to edit it out later). I thought the Windows 3.1 ref was a classic myself, though! And the statement that Wizard can't work on Mac OS X, etc. I wonder if a disclaimer is in order. DOUG (talk) 09:41, 29 March 2015 (CDT)

Yes, for the "internal links not working"...in principle a link to a section on the same page will move the browser down to that section of the page. However, if linking a section, and most things are condensed, the part being linked may already be visible so the browser focus does not scroll down. This is, essentially, proper behavior, but I can see it confusing some people. Ideally, there may be a way to have that section link expand the section it links to (then the behavior is clear and someone's visual attention was shifted rather than "nothing" appearing to happen in some situations). However, I've no idea how to go about that, or what wiki tricks are required. Also I missed the part about Mac OS X and the Wizard; I thought it could work? (Or maybe a version of this page said it couldn't and was false.) Anyway, I didn't have any specific comments about that, and I'm sure you're the expert here. I technically have access to a laptop running OS X but wasn't planning to do much testing... DAID (talk) 02:30, 30 March 2015 (CDT)

Ok, spent the day sorting through section (as opposed to page) transclusion via link and just with content. Modified the existing FAQ section to show how it works - but have also made a request on the Pump which will greatly ease editing. To see how this is rendered using this techique, see the User:DOUG/Sandbox Transclusion Tests page. DOUG (talk) 18:43, 29 March 2015 (CDT)

Hey Doug. I just wanted to pop in again for a naive question. I think especially for SPOILER content on articles, it should also be done via a drop down. Our eyes see more than only what we focus on, and even the spoiler alert tag is insufficient. I glanced at the article raw data, but you're doing some pretty fancy stuff (kudos!). I'd like to have a regular section of a regular article done by drop down. Can you give me a hint on how to do that? If one needs to be created, a name like "spoiler" and even some red text or small print before someone clicks would be perfect. DAID (talk) 21:51, 2 April 2015 (CDT)

I like that idea. Created this as an example Spoiler_on_page_(sample), but think it would be helpful to make it a template, too - so all options can be specified, and over-loaded with user desired parameters more easily. I'll give it some thought over the weekend. DOUG (talk) 22:24, 2 April 2015 (CDT)

We need an obligatory screen-shot, too. I think there (might) be some recent issues with uploading files (only because I saw a subject on the forums by Scribes similar to this which I neglected to read as of yet). Anyway, everyone likes eye candy. I'd say, make a fairly wacky arrangement of icons. Maybe I can toss the Wizard together on my PC and do my own "preferred" setup, just to exemplify a strong strength of the Wizard for layout control. I do a strong left corner focus, with all the status icons jumbled, the command entry floated up a bit, the hand information under that (and the left hand on the LEFT and the right hand on the RIGHT because even if the right hand is primary it's still on the right side!!!) DAID (talk) 21:56, 2 April 2015 (CDT)

Agreed! I have two screenshots (Wizard screen and keyboard movement template graphic) that were resident in the Help File. You're spot on about the Upload pages, though - presently assigned to Bureaucrat or above, looks like. Hopefully that'll get fixed soon. DOUG (talk) 22:24, 2 April 2015 (CDT)

LOL. Yet we didn't see a pile of forum posts about image uploading issues! (Though, Scribes posted quickly, too.) The inane banter about the login requirement is amusing since it fits the model of a bug or a temporary feature (or suicide) much more than intent. I can't believe my reply on LNet that they imported from KP got a response asking me for the KP licensing. It's definitely a tricky issue, and I don't think KP had a license. But if you know anything about copyright, it means you haven't waived any of your rights, and if you are the provable creator of content, then indeed it's yours, even if that's harder to show without a little fancy symbol. The bigger question is about all of Simu's own copyrights (or similar laws) on the material. It's no surprise at all that Gswiki:Copyright is a red link; this is a legal nightmare. Also sorry for the rant but I wanted to put it somewhere public...just not a place most anyone will read it. Haha. DAID (talk) 23:06, 2 April 2015 (CDT)