Proposed design

Edge cases

lexeme does not have senses

Notify the user and still allow them to select it and if they do, show them the CTA to add to wikidata hyperlinked to the Lexeme page

@DSmit-WMF can we know before lexeme selection whether they have senses or not?

In T341069#10984799, @Jdforrester-WMF wrote:

Is Amin's design sketch above the final, agreed version? There haven't been any updates here, but maybe somewhere else?

Lexeme Sense selection UI design exploration
I understand that Lexemes and sense are not exactly the same thing as words and definitions, permit me to use them interchangeably. When a word has multiple definitions and you want to find it, you will first of all think of the word then think of the definitions like in the dictionary. Also definitions/senses are phrases or sentences and not 1 word so it is going to be more difficult to search directly for them. As a result, a direct search for lexeme senses may not be the best experience.

Proposed design

@DSmit-WMF Volunteered to implement this and would update us when she begins work

In T352201#10876784, @KColeman-WMF wrote:

Another example: TSP has an icon-only small button which will trigger a popover for User Info Card.

In T391117#10823536, @Jdforrester-WMF wrote:

Assuming this was signed-off by the OKR driver.

For the inline error we would use a small version of the button component which is being worked on T352201. We would use the quiet destructive button.

@DSantamaria Yes cc @DSmit-WMF

In T350683#9330330, @AAlhazwani-WMF wrote:

after a sync conversation with @gengh we decided to opt for the most simple approach, start learning, and iterate from there. the current issue is: "function creators click/tap on the chevron icon but nothing happens". so, we checked whether we can make that icon interactive, but it's currently not possible. so we're going to remove the icon to avoid confusing people.

moreover, in order to make sure that an entered lookup value is a valid entry we're going to:

1. auto select a value if the entered query is the same as a result item. e.g. function creator enters "string" but doesn't click/tap on the "String" menu item below to confirm/complete the selection
2. clear the lookup field if the entered query is a non-valid entry, e.g. function creator enters "word" and escape focus, but "word" is not an available type

In T350683#10717052, @DSmit-WMF wrote:

Yes that what it does. But we have behaviour that on :blur of the field that we put it back to the previous selected value. But maybe we should remove that logic then aswell.

In T350683#10707659, @DSmit-WMF wrote:

The problem we have with the clearable is the following shown in the gif.
We have logic to set the value back to the previous selected onBlur.
So if you clear the field with the clearable button or manually, it will always reset to previous value on blur, which looks a bit strange. Do we want to keep that?

This was one of the tasks suggested by Amin earlier for me to work on. But it seems it has already been done, is that right @gengh @DSmit-WMF ?

This label doesn't seem to be clear/specific enough. I would suggest 'Event format', 'Attendance Format' or 'Participation Mode'. @ifried

The options here would be to leave it as Other - Other or change the heading label as mentioned above. Some heading suggestions are: Other options, Additional options or Miscellaneous.

Idea 1: A selected by default checkbox labeled "Include events open to all wikis" below the Wikis filter	Idea 1b: A selected by default toggle labeled "Include events open to all wikis" above the event list	Idea 2: Add All events as option in the Wikis filter dropdown

Idea 1A

• A clear separation (but still shows the relationship) of the action of filtering by specific wikis from hiding or showing 'events open to all wikis'. Filtering out events open to all wikis is like a second level of filtering after you may have filtered by specific wikis.
• Follows common UI pattern
• Easy to find and understand

In T387793#10634853, @ifried wrote:

Update: After discussing this work with @KStoller-WMF, we are considering a reimagining of the project to be the following: Rather than finding how we can add the Collaboration List to the Newcomer Homepage, we expand the capabilities of the Community Update module. Specifically, we make it a way to flip through many events (like how you can flip through many tasks in Structured Tasks, though with a smaller number of events). The first event will be the Community Update module, if there is any. This is like being the top of search engine results — in other words, it still makes the community update take precedence by being what people see first. But users can flip through more events to find what may interest them. There’s some potential trickiness to this (since the Community Update is submitted via admins, whereas the rest of the events come via the Collaboration List), but the idea makes sense to me from a user perspective.

@gonyeahialam, for the next iteration of this work, can you focus on this concept? Perhaps you can meet with @JFernandez-WMF to learn more about how Growth has previously thought about the concept of flipping through events as a starting point.

i hope this is helpful, lemme know!

Based on the above:

• The default will be the raw transcluded event lists.
• Users will set up the formatting themselves using wikitext.
• We will provide documentation on formatting using wikitext.
• There will be an 'Explore more events' link at the end of the event list linking to the full collaboration list, and when users visit the main collaboration list, the filters in the transcluded list will also be applied

I guess we need to make a decision for what the MVP will be like, either:

1. Have some basic (may be just a scrollable list) default presets and give users the flexibility to remove or customise as they fit
2. Have no preset and as @Daimona suggested:

Maybe provide examples, would be my answer. Have a section in the documentation that explains that the page is transcludable, and give wikitext snippets with some examples. After all, how are people going to learn that the page is transcludable, if not via documentation? That gives them something they can copy and that will mostly just work.

Given these considerations are we still able to add a link to the collaboration list special page or do we also leave that to the wiki text user @MHorsey-WMF @Daimona

Link on top	Link at the bottom

• We assume that the users are not wiki text power-users and provide a more full featured experience
  • This would provide a much more functional product out of the box but removes the flexibility and customisation that a more capable wiki text user would prefer.