[00:00:08] #endmeeting [00:00:09] Meeting ended Tue Jun 3 00:00:08 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) [00:00:09] Minutes: https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-06-02-23.00.html [00:00:09] Minutes (text): https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-06-02-23.00.txt [00:00:09] Minutes (wiki): https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-06-02-23.00.wiki [00:00:09] Log: https://tools.wmflabs.org/meetbot/wikimedia-office/2014/wikimedia-office.2014-06-02-23.00.log.html [00:00:17] let's continue this chat onwiki or onlist :) Thanks all [00:00:18] quiddity the text-size example was to ilustrate that although there are especific mixins for size, you could make any property to be responsive (in addition type changes were exaggerated to be noticeable) [00:00:52] Yup, that's what I figured. Thanks for confirming though. :) [00:01:01] gwicke: yes, that's what we were proposing i think [00:01:07] okay, great [00:01:17] alright. I just want to say big thanks pginer for working on this! I've been wishing for a grid system for a while, both as an editor and a fundraiser [00:01:18] just came back from a meeting, now reading the backlog [00:01:30] basically exposing the grid system to the skin and/or common.css, and letting the wiki itself define appropriate semantic classes using the grid system [00:01:43] and then those semantic classes would be the thing exposed to content (rather than the grid system directly) [00:02:00] but that's step two or three or four, i gather [00:02:01] we would like authors to use semantic classes [00:02:10] whether we can force them to use semantic classes is another matter [00:02:22] we can probably gently encourage it using the template styling feature [00:02:44] fwiw, wikiquotes was very diligent itself about not adding extraneous size or other styling to their images. [00:02:58] the problem is that 'bare thumb' is only a single semantic class. it would be nice if there were more. ;) [00:03:10] i think we can also encourage semantic markup w/ VE [00:03:29] if you provide classes for use in MediaWiki:Common.css or in some new template style feature, presumably it will be possible to use those classes in style attributes [00:03:37] well, in class attributes [00:03:39] ideally there should be checkboxes or a drop down for 'type of image', and the direct manipulation of handles should be mildly discouraged [00:04:02] I'm not sure how you would technically discourage that [00:04:16] but maybe it's not necessary if we provide appropriate tools for semantic classes [00:04:17] yes, [[Image:Foo.jpg|class=bar]] works now. it's not the tersest markup, but if VE is generating the class attributes, the extra typing shouldn't matter. [00:04:50] template styling is probably critical [00:05:04] TimStarling: one way to discourage it would be switch between (say) one-column and two-column styles when you drag the image handles, instead of adding MxNpx attributes. [00:05:23] there might be a checkbox to allow direct image sizing, but it would be an 'advanced' option. [00:05:29] it's all about what you make easy [00:05:57] anyway, that's a separate discussion probably [00:08:59] of course classes can also be set by image type [00:13:35] sumanah: we will need to have another RFC meeting about square bounding boxes [00:13:57] TimStarling: this week work for you? Thurs morning your time? [00:14:31] yes [00:14:47] I'll set it up. Anyone else in particular (other than the author of course) need to be there? [00:14:57] meaning me? [00:14:59] ;) [00:15:28] i'd like to actually put something in Tech/News, but that requires a week lead time [00:16:04] basically make a best effort to publicize the RfC discussion. even though that means that it's possible we will accomplish nothing due to low snr. [00:16:14] sumanah: well, you're on the email discussion, so you know who is involved [00:17:05] i'd also like to give some time for flames to die down, rather than rush into the next square discussion right away [00:17:47] is there also ongoing design work? [00:18:33] ok, I'll get those folks [00:18:55] cscott: guillom might be able to help you blare the horns all around Wikimedia world [00:18:59] Tech News and other places [00:19:02] mm, not really. the desired semantics are that upright have a square bounding box. since normal thumbs don't (any more), that gives it usefully unique semantics. the # of images with 'upright' is very low (orders of magnitude lower), so the amount of editor commotion should be much lower. but.... [00:19:16] Signpost would take a blurb from you for the tech report tonight/tomorrow AM I bet [00:19:38] sumanah: I think cscott is saying it should be later than thursday [00:20:07] pginer: congratulations on your first -1 for 125387 [00:20:09] oh I misunderstood. OK, I can schedule the chat for next week (on sq bounding boxes). Thanks [00:20:10] ...gwicke has suggested that we think harder about semantic image classes, so we can talk about a big picture for image markup. [00:20:20] sumanah: yes, later than thursday. [00:20:29] really, next month would be best ;) [00:20:44] cscott: more earnestly - name a M/W/F date and I can make it happen probably [00:21:15] but i'll settle for "some time after Tech/News announces the upcoming RfC meeting", but i need to look at publication schedules to figure out exactly when that could be. [00:21:41] I need to head off - I've been running this meeting all through a dinner at my place with several other Wikimedians, who of course understand, but. Dessert time. cscott ping me with a date :-) [00:22:02] i need to finish my dinner too. east coast ftw! [00:22:19] will be in touch [00:22:19] :) [00:22:23] o/ [00:22:25] cscott: The AL standings beg to differ [00:22:35] Trollolololo [00:22:43] hey, we just won 7 in a row. we're coming back, baby! [00:23:06] I looked at the league standings this morning [00:23:14] The A's and the Giants are kicking everyone in the face [00:23:16] Repeatedly [00:23:26] basically, the red sox lost every game while jessica and i were in SFO, and then have won every single game since we returned to the east coast. [00:23:31] coincidence? i think not. [00:24:01] Obviously [00:24:11] (well, we lost every single game after we beat the twins that one time) [00:24:16] cscott: Better avoid washing whatever shirt you're wearing right now [00:24:40] i'm keeping the baby unwashed. saves time in the evenings, too. [00:25:02] I guess so [00:25:10] You don't need to get ready for bed, the smell just knocks you out [00:25:13] Anyway, eat well [00:25:33] when the smell gets too bad, we'll relocate to cologne [00:25:36]

[00:25:43] Bahaha [23:39:29] Hi folks, we'll be starting a Funds Dissemination Committee focused IRC in 20 minutes. [23:39:41] We'll be talking specifically about nominations. [23:40:02] #wikimedia-office +v KatyLove [23:40:23] #wikimedia-office +v patrickearley [23:45:33] How d'you get them thar fancy +o, patrickearley? [23:46:10] From Mr. James [23:46:28] Mr. Alexander I should say. [23:46:34] Jamesofur: That sounds like fun [23:46:55] * Jamesofur waves [23:46:59] go go KatyLove [23:47:08] go go gadget funds [23:47:11] however I should have told Mr. Earley that we prefer to leave people without the active +O ;) [23:47:12] Hi heatherw! [23:47:22] that's my fault though, it isn't an 'obvious' thing [23:47:45] Jamesofur: Oh sure; I'm not looking for that, I'm just saying I tend to do cleanup stuff in here and it would be cool to have +o. Or not or whatever :) [23:49:14] marktraceur: what kind of cleanup? :) [23:49:26] banning trolls! [23:49:39] Well no [23:49:55] Usually it's topic-related, but moderating troublesome folk would also be a helpful superpower to have [23:50:17] * Jamesofur nods [23:50:57] as long as you keep the permanent logging note and be sensitive about not overusing any of the tools (or keeping Op/v in the channel) [23:51:19] *nod* [23:51:37] Thankee Jamesofur [23:56:42] Hi delphine! [23:57:04] Hey Risker :) [23:58:09] I'm really here by accident [23:58:15] I should be in bed! [23:58:42] Hi Risker! [23:58:52] And yes you probably should, delphine [23:58:53] :) [23:59:08] hi folks [23:59:18] good to see you [23:59:31] :)