Page layout/format brainstorming

[Chris Day]

Chris, I'd say, let's do some experimentation  (can you give me a template + page it's used on that I can test out?), on the off chance that Aaron et al. can't, or aren't motivated to, set up the "server side" subpage links.

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/John_Doherty_%28fiddler%29

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Template:Subpages3

Clearly (2).  That's how {{subpages}} worked when I wrote it, and deliberately so.  Create as much uniformity as possible and you make the website easier to browse.

And it is still that way, since the first three listed happen to be the defaults.  The problem comes when you decide to redesignate the defaults especially if you decide that one well down the list will become a default. In reality, i don't see defaults being changed all that often, so realistically the easiest solution is just to manually place all the default subpages at the top of the "subpages list"

I haven't studied how you've changed the template (documentation would be nice, but I haven't been good in that dept. myself).  We can simply make the default templates the first n in the list, and then in {{subpages}} make the first n automatically display.

OK this sounds like you agree with what i was thinking above.  And yes, I'll try and document the rationale for the various changes i made. 

One thing i did was strip out the NAMESPACE variable, since I assumed this template was not going to be used on user pages etc. (that's why you'll note it does not work on your test pages in your user space (i only remember you had it in your user space after I had removed the NAMESPACE's).

[Larry Sanger]

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/John_Doherty_%28fiddler%29

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Template:Subpages3

Not working on IE 7 + my laptop:

[Chris Day]

Not working on IE 7 + my laptop:

That's a pain. Maybe it's keying off a different position in your browser or off your screen?  I have no idea how to fix it.  Back to the drawing board i guess.

One thing is that it looks like it is moving relative to the right of your screen.  Whereas I coded it to move relative to the left side.

Edit:  OK, I now see that you changed one of the align right parameters to an align left.  it still looks good on my screen and i assume is good on yours too.

[Greg Woodhouse]

This is Safari under OS X

[Stephen Ewen]

It displays the same as above in Firefox 2.0.0.5.

[Larry Sanger]

Hmm, those are problems--absolute positioning will make different-looking pages in different browsers.  I think this is a deal-killer for that method.  Well, we'll have to see if we can motivate some coders to work with Fredrik on the skin redesign.

[Derek Harkness]

Well, we'll have to see if we can motivate some coders to work with Fredrik on the skin redesign.

I'm already working on it. Can't say I'll get things exactly the same as Fredrik's plan, but it will be the basis of a skin for the wiki. Some features of Fredrik's design will require us to edit a little bit of the php/html code of the mediawiki script, I can't do all of it using skins alone. However I think it's all doable with a little time.

As for the people who want some changes to Fredriks design, using skins, we can make those changes available to those who want them. We can have a default skin and a number of variations on the theme. So any ideas that people have - voice them.

[Chris Day]

How are the skins going? I'm going to bump this thread for another reason, to continue a tangent on templates from another thread.

I have cut and paste my comment below from http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,1118.msg8690.html#msg8690

The issue of the horizontal (tab) model or vertical (along the right) model also needs resolving.  I'd suggest a simple community-wide vote on that matter.

How about both? The more I think about this the more I realise that a horizontal version on galleries is always going to be preferable. I know Larry is strongly for vertical, but even if this is the case, there is no reason why a subset of subpages could not use a horizontal. The Japan article and the  Biology article currently have a mixture (see the gallery page in both cases that use a horizontal tab). Are there other kinds of subpage that will have an inherent need for a horizontal version?

With respect to the functionality of the template there is another pressing issue that should be resolved as soon as possible. What is the role of the draft page.  Note in that same Japan article the main article redirects to the draft page.  Another solution is to have a template placed on the main article explaining there is no approved article and to help at the draft page (See Anthropology).  The third option is to continue with the current status (See Civil society), that is to work towards approval on the main article and once approved shift the editable version to the draft page.

[Stephen Ewen]

You are clearly right about gallery pages, Chris.  I am obviously still very uncomfortable with the tacky squeeze that both text and lede images receive on the main and draft article pages, with the column version. 

But the ultimate question as regards the tabs or column design is not what any of us prefer, but what will average readers prefer and find most easy to use and intuitive.  With the advent of tabbed browsers, and based upon how the human eye approaches formats containing left-to-right texts (like English), I would predict the tabbed model would would win hands-down.  It is possible to design a small study and sample average readers on the question, and if we really want to make the right design decision, that would be the way to go.  Also, experts specialize in online curriculum design--and note that is exactly what we are doing here with this whole subpages venture--and could advise on the matter (we may even have one or two such persons on the wiki). [/s]

[Derek Harkness]

Another solution is to have a template placed on the main article explaining there is no approved article and to help at the draft page (See Anthropology).  The third option is to continue with the current status (See Civil society), that is to work towards approval on the main article and once approved shift the editable version to the draft page.

I'm not so keen on  the style use on [[Anthropology]]. It puts a barrier between the user and the majority of our content. It requires the user to take an extra step before then find what they were looking for. It also forces them to think. The general rule of thumb should be that we do the thinking so the user doesn't have to. If you make the user think then they might think the best solution is the back button out to Google. Lets put the content front and center and easy to find. When an article needs approving, we do the hard work moving things, not the end user.

How are the skins going?

Slowly, I've been distracted on other things (like work and some government bureaucracy).

To both Stephen and Chris, the problems you are finding with the position/appearance of the sub pages template will be completely negated by taking a holistic view of the site and designing afresh. I'll be making at least two skins. One for default users who just read and don't edit (with the editing and admin links hidden there will be more space on the page for other items) and another for authors/editors who need every link at the fore front.

[Chris Day]

To both Stephen and Chris, the problems you are finding with the position/appearance of the sub pages template will be completely negated by taking a holistic view of the site and designing afresh.

I understand that, the template is definitely not preferable to a mediawiki solution. Although the current templates have been good with respect to helping us know what we need. Also the template has other functions such as adding categories and organising the metadata.  The latter functionality will live on even though the navigation aspect of the template will move to mediawiki.

One for default users who just read and don't edit (with the editing and admin links hidden there will be more space on the page for other items) and another for authors/editors who need every link at the fore front.

This sounds like an elegant solution.

[Stephen Ewen]

I agree, Derek.  Can't wait to see your work. 

[Larry Sanger]

How do we need to change this

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Subpages/Which_style%3F

before we can call for a vote?

[Derek Harkness]

Can I vote for none of the above - In true Brewster's Millions style.

It seems to me like your choosing form apples and bananas when you have never even looked at oranges and peaches. It's set of from the start as vertical or horizontal and I have yet to see an people examine all the options. There are a multitude of navigation tools that that haven't been considered yet.

Also, both proposals are based on a html table. This makes life difficult for me to style using CSS. Can the html output of the template be change to use list markup <ul> and <li> rather than table. This make the code much more flexable for a designer to play with.

[Greg Woodhouse]

Also, both proposals are based on a html table. This makes life difficult for me to style using CSS. Can the html output of the template be change to use list markup <ul> and <li> rather than table. This make the code much more flexable for a designer to play with.

Good point. There is a school of thought that tables should not be used for formatting, and that CSS should be used instead.