Tue, Sep 17
Updates in the works:
Mon, Sep 16
Fri, Sep 13
Thu, Sep 12
Tue, Sep 10
Mon, Sep 9
Sounds good! We'll see how testing goes this week, and I'll have any
changes made and shared before I'm off bc of moving mid-next week.
Can confirm this is correct. Rejected tags have a slightly different treatment in the latest iteration (which I'll be testing):
Wed, Sep 4
Tue, Sep 3
I've been trying out different ways of linking out to the image's file page, in case users need to go there for whatever reason. It'd also be good for users to be able to "zoom" in on an image as well. We can feed two birds with one seed by using existing functionality: when a user taps on an image, that image opens in MediaViewer. This works really well on mobile web, because MediaViewer is an overlay, I believe. If MV is turned off, tapping on an image could just open the FP in a new tab.
Wed, Aug 28
Tue, Aug 27
Tested it this morning with two images, and adding statements to one image each, and copying to the other. Seems to work fine...
Mon, Aug 26
Aug 22 2019
Aug 21 2019
Aug 20 2019
Closing this because we went with another solution (linking the labels themselves) and that is now live.
Closing this old ticket, because it was completed (with just one tester) nearly a year ago. Feedback was incorporated into Captions at that time.
Aug 19 2019
I took a look at this and it works fine for me.
Aug 15 2019
Hi @AnneT! I can answer #2. Yes, we would want to disable the Edit link. I know these mocks are old and don't show the Edit link at all, but I think showing that the Edit link is disabled is good additional context for users.
Aug 12 2019
Possibly! I plan on usability testing the current editing interface for statements on Commons this month, and depending on the results of that test, I may use this styling in some iterative designs.
Aug 9 2019
Aug 8 2019
@egardner I like that idea, but it feels out of scope for now. I'd like to roll this use case into our UI consolidation for statements though, so I'm sticking a pin in it for later discussion/iteration.
I've thought of two simple options:
Aug 7 2019
Looks good enough for me, thanks @egardner!
Aug 6 2019
It's good to go for me, @egardner!
Jul 25 2019
@Cparle -- Screenshot looks good -- I'm thinking we're going to need typographic adjustments in the statements refresh designs. It looks weird to have the learn more link the same size/weight as the property label. Taking note!
Hey @egardner - whatever is simplest sounds good to me.
Jul 24 2019
@Mholloway I think that's definitely worth discussing. I was imagining non-logged in users could participate, but be warned that their IP address would be logged in the edit history.
Jul 23 2019
Yes, I'd be curious about how feasible it'd be to have than information
stored somewhere -- but I'm not sure where or what kind of workflow that
would require. Worth considering!
Hey @Cparle I know this ticket has become rather gnarly, but I don't think the original AC has been met:
"Remove all" button deletes the statements panel for all statements except Depicts
Jul 22 2019
I thought that if a property or item has no label in a particular language, the P or Q number will show instead (and now that labels are linked). Is that not the case any more?
I'm in favor of tracking negative votes as wiki revisions, especially since a negative vote should be able to be reverted. I am curiuos about counting abstaining votes though. How or why would an abstention be counted? Especially if we were to consider the default state of a tag to be neutral?
That should be another ticket, we still need the "Remove all" functionality to remove the property itself.
Jul 18 2019
Jul 17 2019
Jul 16 2019
Thanks, Eric. I think it'd be best to have the new element only show once (on the first image) in UW but if @Ramsey-WMF is okay just showing it on FP for now, that sounds good to me.
Jul 10 2019
Hey Eric, here are the updated designs:
Jul 8 2019
After I last checked in on it, we changed the placement of “Publish changes” to the lower right to match Captions… which has been great in terms of consistency for most users, except that it means more tabbing to actually publish any changes. @egardner, is it possible to enable “Enter” to publish the change after it’s been validated?
Okay, thanks @Cparle - never mind then. Ramsey's solution would work best. I think the text does a good job of explaining what'll happen.
@Cparle - Agree with Ramsey here that there needs to be a confirmation model. I'm assuming this kind of action won't be taken often (deleting all values, including the property) but I do think there needs to be sufficient warning that property and anything underneath it will be deleted.