Taglines mentioned in the description are in here.

Found https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Cbrown1023/Logos

Looks good! Thanks @Jdrewniak sorry for all the fiddly-ness!

@Jdrewniak can you show an example of H3s and H4s?

In T351838#9354115, @Jdlrobson wrote:

Sorry didnt get time to do this. You can bug Jan to get an instance setup otherwise Ill circle back to this on Monday!

In T351838#9353469, @Jdlrobson wrote:

@JScherer-WMF https://patchdemo.wmflabs.org/wikis/2a7c033d11/wiki/Paris is out of date so let me create a new instance for this testing. When do you need it by?

Wordmark here:

Is it possible @Jdlrobson to use the following colours in the Patchdemo you made?

@ovasileva and I jammed on these and put them through a bunch of iterations. Our guiding principles were clarity, translatability, accessible reading level, and carrying over existing labels on similar elements. Here's where we landed:

Updated logo attatched.

Based on the analysis of community prototypes documented here, and academic research on readability documented here let's propose the following for our new type size options.

@Jdrewniak When you're finished reverting this, please assign to me, and I'll work out a design that doesn't break at smaller viewports.

I spoke to @Sarai-WMDE about this this morning, and she mentioned that Codex already has a small option in the scale. I think we just need to spec out which elements take on that style when we implement the new typescale options.

In T349622#9341573, @ovasileva wrote:

In T349622#9341533, @Jdlrobson wrote:

@Esanders it looks like your patch to https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/968650 didn't work as expected (see comment from @jhsoby and @Edtadros )
@ovasileva not sure if this constitutes a regression in your perspective. Should we revert the patch or do you see this as an overall improvement?

If possible, I'd say let's revert until we can get it to look slightly better. I agree that the current positioning feels a bit awkward. @JScherer-WMF - wondering what you think as well.

Draft analysis is here:

@ovasileva Do we already have a ticket for implementing the skeleton? I will meet with the implementing dev when it's time for implementation. Moving to sign off.

@KSarabia-WMF @Jdlrobson I had a look at the overflow behaviour of the tools and ToC menu components when the bottom of the menu extends past the bottom edge of the page you can scroll them separately from the main content. In the case of the theme menu, we could apply this behaviour to both the Tools and Theme menus combined. If the combined height of tools plus theme exceeds the total height of the page, you could scroll both as one content area.

In T350612#9324184, @Theklan wrote:

Where will this settings interface go? Would it be an standalone or something that pop-ups also with the tools menu?

We're hoping to implement a version of this for the type settings interface. See T350612. Here's what that's looking like right now based on the Figma above.

In T350612#9310025, @Volker_E wrote:

In course of this, please note T311874: Design and build Skeleton loader.

In T349622#9288596, @Jdlrobson wrote:

@JScherer-WMF does the proposal in the task description (see also demo link) look good to you?

RTL illustration here

Illustration attatched.

@Jdlrobson I reviewed this again. The pages referenced above are Foundation-wide legal pages that use of our trademark generally, not the Vector22-specific landscape layout. Those pages are still technically right, even if they don't apply to vector. So If you want to document this, we should do it in a different space. If it's a matter of giving communities guidelines for updating their logos in Vector, it should probably be documented in the design system somewhere with all of the other design specs.

In T349210#9302803, @Jdlrobson wrote:

@JScherer-WMF I've captured this question in T350418 as it's not of upmost importance to decide it now. Feel free to close out the ticket if that makes sense.

I looked through the data and visualized it here