← Back to Technology report

Discuss this story

• The Module namespace has used CodeEditor since launch. The new addition is for CSS and JS pages. Anomie⚔ 14:23, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• The packed-hover is a good tech. Nice additions. Benison talk with me 15:10, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Wow, the new gallery is amazing! I quite like it. — -dainomite   16:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• The new galleries are beautiful - well done to all involved. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:14, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Quite appropriate that Adam should demonstrate it with some of his own restorations, since it's often files like that which don't conform to standard dimensions (like #3, above) and you really notice the difference in galleries with the whitespace.. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:13, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heh, well, it's a bit hard to find a really oddly-proportioned gallery on Wikipedia, because they looked so awful with the old gallery style, but I've had a gallery of FPs on my user page for years. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• See also the galleries on mobile view. "Packed-hover" looks strange. --Atlasowa (talk) 20:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suspect that's an issue with one caption taking up two lines in that example. Mobile view, as I understand it, strips most gallery code. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 21:01, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• At WikiProject Open Access some of us organize a "file of the day" and put new non-text media into a gallery daily. I just changed this to a packed gallery and the images are slow to load and some do not load at all. This is on Commons, not Wikipedia. See Commons:Commons:Open_Access_File_of_the_Day. Where are conversations about this tag? Nothing is happening at Help_talk:Gallery_tag. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:07, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Packed-hover behaves like packed-overlay on my iPad. Known issue? - PKM (talk) 01:56, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should have mentioned: On the mobile site, that's a planned change, since many touchscreens don't have a hover-over option. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:14, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"new user-facing features, like the ability to search within a category, are planned"

Great news! :) Now it would be cool to make it even easier to search by crossing many categories, and allowing searching subcategories as well. --NaBUru38 (talk) 18:54, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From conversations, it sounds like those are planned, but realise this is very early stages: The old search was a mess, so it had to be rewritten into a stable version before any other improvements could be done. We're going to get new search features, but I don't think anyone can promise anything until coding's a lot further on. =) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:24, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• New search backend live on mediawiki.org. --Atlasowa (talk) 20:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: How is this any different from incategory:? πr² (t • c) 20:28, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That you'd need to ask the developers about. I would presume it would include subcategories, perhaps? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 20:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What we are talking about is incategory:, yes. The major difference we've accomplished here (which I think was lost in the blurb) is that we've made it possible to have multiple incategory: terms in a single search, opening the door for category intersections. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 02:17, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]