OK, sorry for trying to clarify and help. Got the message, will keep out of the discussion going forward again.

Incidentally we're just having a very similar discussion in the Inkscape project, and I believe I can clarify some things here:

That's why this is an "Epic" bug (and should track such blocking issues)... nobody said it would be easy (if at all possible) to implement.

In T40010#4432901, @Aklapper wrote:

Inkscape is not a rendering library but an image manipulation application that uses librsvg as its rendering library (at least on Fedora).

In T113177#1664842, @Jdlrobson wrote:

You say it "needs to be changed" but I'm missing the why... so right now it just reads as a personal distaste of an existing design so I would appreciate more explanation to what the problem is here so we can assess different designs.

To add a little prespective here's a mock-up of what I could envision to work pretty well usabilty-wise and blend in perfectly with the present UI

In T113177#1657407, @Tgr wrote:

The "hover" design you link to would have turned the whole preview image into a button to open Media Viewer; that would probably be very contentious without any clear benefit.

That design was never preferred by me and I agree it would probably be controversial, but I wanted to put the link, since this ticket represented the previous effort of the WMF team to solve the issue.

First of all the long established accesskeys (with "S" for saving and "P" for preview respectively) should be added to Flow.

librsvg 2.40.9-2 is now in Debian testing. Is this enough to use it on Wikimedia servers?

This is finally fixed upstream!

Since it isn't mentioned anywhere explicitly:
The implementation should probably be generic enough to catch all kinds of pages (articles, files, templates, etc.)

That's great news! Let's hope that besides security (which he mentions on his blog) Frederico will also be working on merging patches / features.

In T76983#833100, @Gilles wrote:

I was also asking to rate general quality, not just sharpness. Regardless of how people interpreted the question about sharpness, the one about quality was unambiguous and that's the part I was referring to.

In T76983#833053, @Gilles wrote:

When I ran my small survey I was surprised to see that more people actually preferred the chained thumbnails (with its known extra sharpening), despite the clear quality loss from a theoretical perspective. I didn't expect that at all. Like I said earlier, I saw that a couple of people with a keen eye spotted the chained ones and systematically voted them down, but they were the minority by far.