| Iniquity | |
| Jul 25 2019, 6:42 PM |
| F29758751: 100px-OOjs_UI_icon_alert_destructive.svg.png | |
| Jul 25 2019, 6:43 PM |
| F29758730: 100px-OOjs_UI_icon_edit-ltr-progressive.svg.png | |
| Jul 25 2019, 6:42 PM |
| F29758750: 100px-OOjs_UI_icon_alert-destructive.svg.png | |
| Jul 25 2019, 6:42 PM |
At the moment, at Commons, all sets of icons are mixed into one pile, this creates problems for community developers with the definition of current icons. It is necessary to solve this problem.
All icons are described here (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/OOUI_icons), but inside they have the same name and the same categorization.
Just for example what we are having now:
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open | None | T179154 Have a way to export and update Wikimedia Design System (Codex, OOUI) icons on Commons | |||
| Open | None | T229046 Naming and categorization of OOUI, VisualEditor, Apex and OOUI based icons on Commons |
It is a bit strange to discuss Commons categories outside of Commons. Usually the talk page is used there.
There is a naming scheme which is used quite consequently:
You may create a new image category and move all outdated icons. The remainder in the current category should be those displayed in the gallery, or some new SVG might be added to the gallery.
It's just that this question relates more to the technical part than to the Commons issues.
- OOjs UI icon listNumbered-ltr apex.svg is an apex variant.
As far as I know, there is no longer a separation by themes. I can be wrong. But if it exists, then the topic name must be moved from the end of the file name to the beginning.
- OOjs UI icon alert destructive.svg (no hyphen) is an outdated (oojs 2017) graphics with outdated naming schema. However, there are users who want to conserve that appearance for any other purpose and do not care about current oojs design. Therefore the former graphics is kept.
Yes, this is an obsolete naming convention and an obsolete file. In my opinion, this should be displayed in the title, and not just in the category.
You may create a new image category and move all outdated icons. The remainder in the current category should be those displayed in the gallery, or some new SVG might be added to the gallery.
It is necessary to more accurately understand what categories are needed and how to change them.
The naming is from 2017, and all icons received meaningful and systematic names when the files were created. At that time, the name has been correct.
I am not responsible for the quick changes in appearance, structures and usage of all these icons.
Rather than renaming and triggering bot activities round the world those who ask for work to be done may put their power into an updated description of the files in question, and creating a sub-category for those icons which are not longer used in mid of 2019 OOjs UI.
It is not a good idea to rename all such files every time when the design department smashes the structures every six months.
Those files which are currently not in the OOjs set might be part of OOjs next week again. Just someone may decide that the one and only LTR edit icon is offensive against RTL writers, and File:OOjs_UI_icon_edit-rtl.svg etc. receive new graphics and become official again. It is a very bad idea to rename every time the files and by global renaming bots change hundreds of pages every time the OOjs management changes their mind.
I'm sorry, but why do you think CommonsDelinker's work is bad? It helps the community and individual developers keep the design up to date. A local developer will see that he is using an outdated icon and will change it. He will not need to come to the Commons and view the icons individually.
It is disturbing the watching users (who are supervising bot flag edits) and is blowing up the version history.
There is a file naming and renaming policy o Commons which limits renaming to really needed cases. Your desire is not important.
And again, it does not make sense to edit forward and backward hundreds of pages every time the glorious design department decidesto chage the icon collection, which happens every few months.
If the status of any icon changes for a few months you may add a note to the description page, and add a sub-category for icons currently not in the OOUI collection.
The file name does not change every few months forward and backward again. This is not done with any image on Commons.
It is disturbing the watching users (who are supervising bot flag edits) and is blowing up the version history.
Um, these files are most often found on technical pages and are followed by such local designers as, for example, me. How can one edit in half a year blow a page? I do not understand. Any examples?
There is a file naming and renaming policy o Commons which limits renaming to really needed cases. Your desire is not important.
We have the 3, 4 and 6 points in the renaming policy for this.
And again, it does not make sense to edit forward and backward hundreds of pages every time the glorious design department decidesto chage the icon collection, which happens every few months.
No, it makes sense, I’m tired forever manually checking the compliance of the icons with the current style guide. Design, which using standard practices of the Foundation, should always be relevant. Plus, this will avoid errors with duplicate files, as well as save old versions of icons.
Just look at the gallery page. That one is maintained and updated. And only that one. Forget all categories and the double amount of icons which have been official OOjs icons two years ago, and might be recovered next month again.
If you want to do some work, then put a history note into the file description page and explain the situation as of summer 2019. But do not waste my time.
And once again, you are discussing internal Commons issues on the wrong project. OOUI is not related to the volunteer Commons icon collection. OOUI does not need Commons nor does WMF design did and does anything to improve the volunteer Commons collection.
But do not waste my time.
It's funny, but I dont care about it :) I think this is the end of my dialogue with you.
I guess PerfektesChaos is just right, I also don't see the real problem here.
@Iniquity so your request implies to rename any file which begins with "OOjs" or "OOUI" which get outdated/updated. This could be indeed impracticable. But I'm open for maintenance ideas, if Wikimedia takes the job (which also implies your request here, but I guess this is could be utopian too).
Anyway this task should be closed as duplicate as task:T179154 claims the same goal.
There doesn't seem to be a clear action for the Editing-team so we are moving this to External
