Rule 1. Back your argument up
Rule 2. Respect other people’s work
Rule 3. Know thyself
Rule 4. Be open to other ideas
Rule 5. Stick to the point
Rule 6. Discuss
If the topic you want to address is under discussion below, please insert your response there, instead of using the New Topic box.
New topic:
Read this first
Due to the magnitude of the changes being undertaken on the design of the site, which involve CSS changes, the experiments will be conducted on a sister site, ![[WWW]](http://wikispot.org/wiki/eggheadbeta/img/sycamore-www.png){kind=small}
http://www.PI-lab.wikispot.org. Please visit this site to get involved in these design issues. The present noticeboard will serve only as place to report progress there for the time being..
—Perig/ Docmartin
Archives
These are the current 'design' issues, I think, under discussion
2009-08-30 07:44:36 For technical reasons, we cannot put the comment box in the template/discuss thing that is (should be) included at the top of each talk page. we have to add it each time we start a talk page, after the "include" thing. —PerigGouanvic
2009-08-31 02:53:21 IMPORTANT NOTE: please visit [templates/discuss] to find the code that must be copied every time a talk page is created. The include macro was causing too many problems. Not a big deal! —PerigGouanvic
2009-08-31 17:42:14 ==How to organize posts==
Do these headings codes work in comments threads? —JohannesKepler
2009-09-01 17:32:50 Brightening up our Stubbies —docmartin
'Stub' image file
As a table:
 |
YOU can help expand it. Guests please do so primarily by adding sections, not by editing the existing ones. More ideas, and some possible material, for the page are on the related discussion page | |
looks like a ciggy?
or...
|
|
YOU can help expand it. Guests please do so primarily by adding sections, not by editing the existing ones. More ideas, and some possible material, for the page are on the related discussion page | |
or (very plain)
|
|
YOU can help expand it. Guests, please do so primarily by adding sections, not by editing the existing ones. More ideas, and some possible material, for the page are on the related discussion page | |
I kinda go for this one really... — Norman
Woow that's real cool. Urban! Seriously, I like it a lot. Yes, the last one, but slightly larger
less cigar-like:
|
|
YOU can help expand it. Guests, please do so primarily by adding sections, not by editing the existing ones. More ideas, and some possible material are on the related discussion page |
|
(note that I removed ", for the page" — alright?)
Yup, short and snappy!
- Doc M
|
YOU can help expand it. Guests are encouraged to do so primarily by adding sections, not by editing the existing ones. More ideas, and some possible material are on the related discussion page |
- How about 'Guests are asked to do so primarily ... etc? (DM)
Centered, better, no? I'd go with that
Yes, - I think the stub box mustn't get too big, after all some fo the 'stubs' are quite decent articles! Keeping the text on the same background as the rest of the page reduces the 'intrusion' too... we gotta find a balance - DM
or something of this sort:
2009-09-01 17:41:33 Well done P-A and Martin, this is really a slam-dunk bit of editing!
2009-09-03 12:06:03 Decision time?
Which stub shall we use - then we can update the pages. I like And how about 'Guests are encouraged to ... etc' rather than the rather teacherly 'asked to'?! —docmartin
|
|
||
|
YOU can help expand it. Guests are encouraged to do so primarily by adding sections, not by editing the existing ones. More ideas, and some possible material are on the related discussion page |
why won't this center though? BTW, this ain't my choice, I'm just trying to get it to center. Now I think it must be a 'bug' Ahmed, help!
This doesn't center because the width of the table is 70%: change it to 100% and:
|
|
I'm quite sure that centering is a better solution, but I can be convinced of the opposite. — Perig
2009-09-03 21:52:15 I've updated the links pointing to PI on the Philosopher site, and I am 'advised' the same is done for our page on WP! —docmartin
New buttons
Forgive me, but this is a test: are we headed the good way if we use buttons such as the edit button up there? It's almost perfect, IMO! Should i try to improve this, and apply to the two other buttons?? (of course we'd have to work on the contrast...) — Perig
Save Our Buttons
Aargh no - this looked like a defective file error to me this morning (see below) - I like the black buttons - bold, imaginative, dynamic - just like, er... Norman!
Can we discuss changes like this before implementing too - treat the Wiki as 'live' now and hence anything that changes the overall design should be 'piloted' first on the Notice board?
Here's a copy of the old edit button, if Perig is okay to restore it pending any 'image makeovers'!
By the way, Norman made the top bar bigger to accomadate your idea of a larger logo - but so far it is the same size?
Re. centering, thanks for the tip. Here is my preferred version then.
|
YOU can help expand it. Guests are encouraged to do so primarily by adding sections, not by editing the existing ones. More ideas, and some possible material are on the related discussion page |
Stub template : Proposing this for adoption
It looks just fine.
=> Jo, Norman?
It looks fine to me. —JohannesKepler
Yes, but I'm puzzled, we seem to have decentred the text part again? —docmartin
Yikes! Not according to my browser — or eyes... Centering problems seem to follow us no matter where we go. That's how life is when you're a philosopher.
Upload new image "centeredornot.jpg"
As the right cerebral hemisphere of PI, I'll jump the gun and use this stub template for my pet page. Home the other side doesn't... mind? — Jo
Re: centered? The template looks centered on Konqueror. — Jo
I'm creating Templates/Stub to put this temporarily definitive stub template. If it is included with the "include" macro, any changes (enhancements) to this template will be visible on all stub pages. — Jo
Edit buttons
P-A and Doc, there are FOUR edit buttons - if we are going to make any changes, then they all need a redesign and some discussion. That is my ruling on the matter. Any further changes without MY Permission will result in IMMEDIATE EXPULSION FROM PI!
Norman
2009-09-04 12:15:58 Humbly sorry, Norman —docmartin
Sorry. I should have done as I often do: change design, capture a screenshot, revert to original version and propose the screen capture for discussion. — Perig
Proposal: smoother edit buttons
Upload new image "photo.png" ... but without the frame.
In context:
Upload new image "editbuttonsmooth.png"
(note that the button has some imperfections (some more pixels should be made transparent) — but you get the idea.)
2009-09-04 19:05:41 Could you mock the set of buttons up and capture in another screeshot?
From this, it looks like it 'might' work, but I would poit out that all the shapes in PI at the moment are these sharp rectangles - the left bar, the upper bars, the search boxes, the edit boxes...
So it's hard to be sure if it would 'fit in'.
If 'Plan A' was to extract the text from the black background, and use it on the bar - technical problems might stop us. Viz, I don't htink you can have transparent 'png's and any attempt to match the yellow may fall apart due to the ways different browsers work. But again, it may be worth a try!
==> Transparent PNGs: that's ok. the one I created for testing purposes Upload new image "photo.png", is a png, and, as you can better see when I remove the frame, has blank corners. —PerigGouanvic
====>However, we'd have to re-create the icons, not modify the existing ones because: 1. pale yellow on orangy yellow is far from optimal; 2. recolouring the letters is beyond my skills, because there are various shades of yellow-brown that should each be given a new colour...
I'd need to have the secret recipe of the PI font, to create from scratch new pngs-on-a-transparent background... feeling tired now... —PerigGouanvic
If Norman gives his permission we could 'pilot' it on the site, but it shoudl be all the buttons, I think, at once, (don't forget the fourth button!) and a preliminary screenshot 'test' seems still worthwhile to me. —docmartin
... but I can do the test when I get the recipe! besides (feeling clumsy) what's this 4th button, again? —PerigGouanvic
Proposal: PI-style buttons
I understand Perig's concern that the buttons look a little "roughly cut" against the orangy background, but I also think that Doc has a point: we must be consistent in our design. This brought me to consider creating buttons having the same style as our "PI" logo. Here's what it looks like (pardon me, but I won't effect the same changes on other buttons unless my idea gathers some interest). Mind you, the white line should be slightly thinner to keep with the design of the logo, but as Perig says, you get the idea.
Upload new image "capture_JK.jpg"
2009-09-04 22:57:13 Good to see Johannes taking charge there! And good too to see the page so well organized - that's what we want to demonstrate - organization! 'Too to' may look clumsy, but see the italic bit at the top of the page if you don't like it, and then complain...
Well, the secret recipe I can reveal: :-) it is a font called 'Party'and the colors used came from the main logo, and before that from the 'pendulum image. If P-A wants, I can try to edit the buttons here using his suggested colors - or with strong black outlines - I quite like that possiblity myself. Jo- the white bordr is not a winner straight away to me, at the moment.
ps,
The Doc is quite wrong about PNGs - I suspect he does not really know much about practical matters - or Global Warming for that matter! Philosophers you know...
2009-09-05 09:16:03 I see Norman had a red face after complaining to the WikiGnomes that they were all 'asleep' - without noticing they had replied promptly - on his personal page!
So I don't know who is less 'practical' / techy - Norman - or me!!! —docmartin
Front page
2009-09-05 23:21:51 Do we 'want' a plain front page again?
I've been making a bit of pgress on it, thanks to AHmed and Jabberwocky... see [test page] Bit rough at the moment, but the possibility is evident - if we want it. —NormanNitram
2009-09-06 01:13:24 Promising! —PerigGouanvic
I especially like the colour here and the general design (proportions). Hope we can have these colours on all the site. — P
This is a beautiful background, and the burgundy color matches well.
- Jo
PI's Vanilla flavours
Font of the logo "PHILOSOPHICAL": F9F0C3
Font of the tiny logo "P": FXXXXX (various tints, according to my color pipette, of vanilla; brighter and stronger):
Background of the test page: FFFCE0
— I guess the burgundies used in the front page title are not exactly the same as in the newly vreated text boxes —
We could use the same colour everywhere on the site, but in different places, to create a distinctive PI "feel". We have:
the text boxes (nice work!) — some could have burgundy text with vanilla background
the two logos would have the same vanilla colour
the burgundy could even be used elsewhere
Trial with the burgundy: 
hm. not exactly as I imagined. If the bar was smaller, perhaps.
Smaller bar: slightly better.
— Jo
Verdict
Not conclusive. —JohannesKepler
- I like version 2 particularly - nice and simple. But the Philosophical Investigations text would do better to sit alongside the coffee (chocolate?) box, ne c'est pas?
— NN
Don't be so hard on yourself, Jo, perfection is in Heavens, not down here. You know that, hm?
Norman, you'll notice that if you change the width of the burgundy (presently orange) line, the buttons (again!) will pose a problem. They're too big. I wonder: can we get rid of the text, and just keep the icons? This will allow to gain some space. But we'll have to minimize a little the icons anyways(or minimize their heights, at least). I'm all for it. -Perig
I don't know for Johannes, but I'm a little mixed up, Norman: "the pi text"... the subtitle (examining...) or the "is an open-access, ..."? And the coffee box: the one that contains the small logo? Perhaps I'm too tired? — Perig
2009-09-06 03:18:51
Footnotes problem
I don't remember: what should we do with footnotes on pages where the use of the include macro breaks the "Footnotes" block in pieces all over the text? I don't think there's an easy solution, except... creating FAKE footnotesab! —PerigGouanvic
Footnotes
a Like this one.i
b Lots of job? perhaps not. And it's better to establish the rules now (and change the site accordingly) than later.
Sub-footnotes
i Note that these footnotes are not links (but they could be (?) =>html anchors within the text?)
2009-09-06 12:21:49 Yes, re. above,
- the fourth button is the 'article' one you see only occasionally eg. here:
http://philosophical-investigations.wikispot.org/Featured_pages/Talk
It seems that it appears each time we are on a talk page, as a link back to the article. —PerigGouanvic
footnotes - well, I think we need to stop the breaking up of the text whatever. So we could try keeping the footnotes to a minimum for the boxes, and giving them in one big lump when the box is 'called' (refereed to) on the page. In other words, any include box has just one footnote, which is seperate from the box, but notedon the boxes page for the benefit of anyone using it. Sort of slows things down though! Is the 'include' function that useful, P-A?
I think the include has two advantages: first, it's a much shorter way to put policy-dependent elements (stub template, talk template (except the comment macro!!), and probably other templates we'll need along the way); 2nd, it's the only way I have found to insert our textboxes without having those large blanks (because tables can't be aligned left or right).
I re-filed the bug report for the footnote-include conflict, and I'll take the responsibility to turn the text boxes into images, as soon as needed, so we can align them right or left and prevent those huge blanks we don't want.
Re: this strategy to keep footnotes to a minimum: unfortunately, this is not how the bug "works". What happens is that any footnote in a page is hijacked inside the include macro, because the include macro has this bug that it calls a [[footnote]] block for some unknown reason. When I created the section [[footnote]] blocks, it was to "purge" the text from pending footnote (once they are displayed, the include macro don't "see" them anymore; same as having two [[footnote]] one after the other: the second will be empty).
More later— —PerigGouanvic
Keep working on it P-A! The footnotes will try to take over otherwise, greedy things...
— NN
The draft page, thanks for the feedback - but I' thought we all liked the general look, so I wasn't planning to change anythign about that. Is the idea that our yellow and black top bars is a bit tacky? But look, let's not open that issue up now - it could distract us. We can refine the edit buttons, but afterwards let's leave the 'general design' alone to look at again in say six months - we have a lot of pages to get back to too! (Not to mention, Wikispot will ahve a blue fit (that's their colour too) if we deleted so much of their stuff everywhere on the site.) Or - we could start a new page called 'Design issues' and keep the discussion separate so as to try to avoid it taking over too much.
(But on my browser, the design was a very rough two colour split - with the pendulum in the middle - just like 'old times'...
see picture 2 [http://philosophical-investigations.wikispot.org/Noticeboard?sendfile=true&file=Picture%202.pdf&download=true]
I knew this version was just a guess - I used dots and [br]s to dummy it up quick! it would be better to create images to control the sizes of all the table cells if we wanted to use a certian design - to avoid 'browser' variations... But no point if we don't have a use for the design anyway, you see.
That still leaves the idea of just having a different fomat 'front page' - I imagined literally just a front page, for external links purposes, and the present thing all the pages links back to called at present 'front page' would become 'start' or 'welcome' or something and remain as the one we 'default' to.
Enlarging the logo
Not to forget, finally, (for now!) are we enlarging the logo or no? —NormanNitram
If we choose to go with the second version proposed by Johannes, with a thinner burgundy line (the more i look at it, the more i find it... elegant), we'll have to wonder how big, in comparison, the logo should be. —Perig
2009-09-06 18:33:24 With the help of Ahmed and Jaberwokky, we have some new quote designs - easy now to choose size and styles... this is just for example... [quotes test page] —NormanNitram
Text styles
2009-09-06 22:00:43
Please visit [Special Text Styles]] - any comments/ ideas though could be here too. —docmartin
2009-09-06 22:20:14 fr Two things - I've restored the default line aroudn the TOCs - deleted as part of my 'no borders (pro-refugees)' policy. Comments though?
Second one is - had anyone been annoyed by the way the file upload dialogue was in the wrong place - unreadable in fact? I hope this 'bug' is better now - but if not...!
Feedback and 'beta' sites
2009-09-08 23:41:38 Thanks for all the ideas and feedback. guys!
The burgundy theme looks pretty classy, actually...
I've been trying a version with the green box too - kind of fond of that but it's all just ideas at the moment, keep 'em coming.
Maybe we should borrow another wikispot name - philosophical-investigations-beta - and just use it to experiment on the overall design? That's really the only way to trial these 'meta' changes... —NormanNitram
I'd be a regular visitor of that site too! Note that we'll be able to make it private, not indexed by search engines. I support this. —
Wait! It's also and excellent place to test content ideas!! I suggest : pi-lab.wikispot.org'. For now, it'll be devoted to CSS experiments mostly, but it could have a second life... — Perig
2009-09-10 14:11:22 Okay, let's go for it! I like Perig's title than Norman's boring one (still in his Citizendium mindset?) —docmartin
2009-09-10 14:12:33 I suspect Google have not been advised of the great migration - I'll get on to that now - unless contradicted. —docmartin
I'll move this last comment to "the" noticeboard. Discussions are over on this noticeboard, and will continue on PI-lab. Seems the right thing to do, - Norman, Jo?
- Perig
2009-09-11 12:18:15 Actually, the Burgundy theme looks a bit too dark to me... plus a bit corporate. It's quite classy in a way though - restful? At the same time, though, have we have lost some of our radical chic? Should we continue to try out colours on a beta site? Lot's of possible colours to choose from once you get into it!
(I've no complaints if we leave it Burgndy here for the time being though..)
Yeah, better to use the lab i myself promoted! I'll suggest a new font color for the text in the burgundy banner and we'll see if we want to revert to the original version, or if we want to test it for a while, ok? — P
I'll see if a brighter version of the burgundy can be found. i was surprised as well by the result. as if Johan's burgundy was different because he applied it on a jpg picture, not the actual website... —P
You are right about my 'abuse' of this noticeboard above - I hope I will not be suspended! —docmartin
2009-09-11 12:22:10 ps there's a little bug with the 'search' text before the search box... —docmartin
i don't see it, with firefox-ubuntu. what is it like? -P
2009-09-15 18:12:15 I'd be in favour of tryng the green theme here too.
http://pi-lab.wikispot.org/Front_Page#preview
- But what to others think? —docmartin
2009-09-15 20:47:59 i agree, especially because i want to see the edit buttons without the tautologic text under! it's thinner, more elegant —PerigGouanvic
PI Going Greener
2009-09-16 12:36:15 Okay! Can you upload the buttons - and shall I ask Norman to do the rest or will you? —90.62.211.175
