Talk:Flow

Jump to: navigation, search

The Core Features team has enabled Flow on this talk page.

Previous feedback is on Talk:Flow Portal/Archive2 (using old Liquid Threads), and on our labs server.

 

Upon posting a reply, all comments in a thread appear to have been posted "45 years ago"

Reply • 1 comment •
1
Gparyanitalk contribs

When viewing a Flow thread, the times of posting for all the comments of that thread appear to have been posted when they have actually been posted ("a day ago", "3 days ago", etc.). However, when adding a new comment to that thread, all the comments suddenly change to appear as though they were posted "45 years ago". This only affects the thread on which the comment was posted on; the other threads on the page remain unaffected. Refreshing the page fixes the problem and causes the times ago to display correctly.

Using Internet Explorer 11 on Windows 8.1.

Reply to "Upon posting a reply, all comments in a thread appear to have been posted "45 years ago""

Add some delay to the hover actions

Reply • 1 comment •
1
Subfadertalk contribs

The hover actions shouldn't pop up immediately on mouseover. This way it often accidentaly opens on scrolling / navigating over the page.

Add some delay. Not sure what is good, maybe 100 ms. Google may know.

Reply to "Add some delay to the hover actions"

converting stuff

Reply • 1 comment •
1
Gryllidatalk contribs

I would like to ask about progress in this area.

Reply to "converting stuff"

Activate on sv:User talk:Nirmos

Reply • 2 comments •
2
Nirmostalk contribs

Hi. Can you activate Flow on sv:User talk:Nirmos?

Quiddity (WMF)talk contribs

Hi, they're currently only activating Flow on new wikis (and pages) very slowly, in order to concentrate on a manageable quantity of features-in-development, and bugs to be examined, at a time. Thanks for your interest though! If you add your name to the (very low frequency, but overdue for a new update) newsletter list at w:Wikipedia:Flow/Newsletter#At other Wikimedia locations, you'll find out when there are new volunteer-locations being looked for, or new features being released. Hope that helps.

Reply to "Activate on sv:User talk:Nirmos"

New feature: Table of Contents

Reply • 15 comments •
15
DannyH (WMF)talk contribs

We're releasing a new Flow feature today on mediawiki -- a Table of Contents, which is designed to help people browse and navigate around a Flow board.

As you scroll down on a Flow board, you'll see a persistent header that gives you access to the Table of Contents, wherever you are on the page. You can scroll around using the Table of Contents, and hop quickly from one topic to another.

The current feature is version 1 -- there are a few more tweaks that we want to make, so there will be a v2 coming. This is also a milestone on the road to Search -- we're going to build the feature to search on a Flow board on top of the ToC feature.

It's going live here a little later today. I'm looking forward to hearing what you all think of it!

Whatamidoing (WMF)talk contribs

It's pretty subtle. It took me a moment to realize that it was actually there. I was expecting to see (without needing to click on anything) an actual list, and therefore something that displayed more than one line of text (by default).

I JethroBTtalk contribs

Yeah, I'm in agreement here that it would have taken me some time to notice it without the announcement. I understand the choice that the list should be clicked on because the TOC loads all topics, and it wouldn't be feasible to display them all at once and push down the rest of the page.

Hey here's an idea. I remember when I opened up the TOC, it covered up the comments on the page. Not a big deal, perhaps, but is there any chance the TOC might be put over in that white space over on the right side there? One benefit to doing this is that opening the TOC would cover up less or none of the comments on the left side of the frame. It might also help it pop-out a little more.

DannyH (WMF)talk contribs

Yeah, we started with the idea that the ToC would be on the right. The idea that won me over to this version is the header changing as you scroll through, to reflect the thread that you're currently on. But if people don't see it, then that's definitely a problem we'll need to solve.

We're doing some user testing late next week on the ToC and a prototype for Search, and one of the basic things we're testing for the ToC is if people actually notice it and use it. :) The tests will be with people who are familiar with wiki talk pages (either reading or contributing to them), so they won't be brand-new newbies. If we see people completely missing the ToC, then we will definitely take steps.

Diego Moyatalk contribs

The problem I see with the new ToC design is that it doesn't even look clickable at all.

If people doesn't see it, a first step to test before recovering the "floating ToC on the right" may be to show it expanded by default when the page is scrolled to the top, showing a preview of the first (last) 6-8 topics and a "browse all" link that unfolds the whole pop-up. Scrolling down would fold the box to its current one-line-tall, current-title behavior.

Painting it blue (the color of links) instead of the current grey may also help.

I JethroBTtalk contribs

Hey DannyH (WMF). I did a little playing around with it over the last 10 minutes or so. I like how I can CTRL-F through the topics once I've opened it up if I know the topic name and don't want to scroll down through all of it. I also like that even if I haven't loaded the entire page, it will still bring me to a topic that's been well-buried at the bottom of list. I did notice that it takes slightly longer (due to the loading) in this case, but I think that's OK.

I did notice something a little strange-- when scrolling through the list with my mouse wheel (Mouse button 3, it sometimes called), I did notice that sometimes it will scroll the through topic list, but sometimes it would switch to scrolling on the background window. Not sure if this is an artifact of monobook or not (which I am using). I'm going to check real fast with vector.

I JethroBTtalk contribs

Hm. Well, I can reproduce the same scrolling issue in vector, but it's kind of hard to describe in words. There seems be some interval of loading time for the topic list after it is visible where the cursor is confused about what part of the screen it is focused on. If you move your mouse around a bit over the topic list, however, the problem appears to fix itself and scrolling is squarely on the topic list rather than the talk page.

Erik Moeller (WMF)talk contribs

Yes, I can repro that scrolling issue in chrome as well.

DannyH (WMF)talk contribs

Oh, thanks for the report. I know that there's been a scrolling issue when it reaches the bottom of the list and there's nowhere else to scroll to -- but it sounds like you're having a different problem. It's happening for you before you hit the end of the list?

I JethroBTtalk contribs

Correct, I can produce the error immediately after I opened it up.

DannyH (WMF)talk contribs

Yeah, I can see it in Chrome. It's not happening in Firefox.

I filed a Phabricator ticket for it -- we'll take care of it. Thanks!

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T87041

Erik Moeller (WMF)talk contribs

Great to see this live.

Small thing: I find the alignment between the sort order ("Newest topics") and the TOC confusing. It makes it look like I can sort the TOC.

DannyH (WMF)talk contribs

Yeah, I agree it's a little confusing. That's something we'll change when we build the Search feature -- Search and ToC will work together as part of the same bar, and the sort order will be in a more obviously separate place.

Diego Moyatalk contribs

Congratulations for the good work. I've been advocating for a table of contents in Flow and following its design iterations from afar, and the results are fairly reasonable. It's a simple and non-intrusive feature that gets the work done, which is something quite difficult to achieve.

I've found a case of a behavior that is not intuitive. After jumping to a topic way down in the middle of the board, scrolling down does the right thing and shows the next topic; but scrolling up triggers a loading animation (so far so good), and when it ends, it jumps to the first topic in the batch of new topics. This is quite surprising, as the expected behavior is to show the end of topic right above the one where I jumped first.

For example, if I jump to "WIBNI infinite scrolling" and scroll up, I'd expect to see the end of "Have bugs been fixed?" which is the immediately previous one, and instead the screen flickers and the scroll bar jumps to the totally unrelated "Topic appears two times".

DannyH (WMF)talk contribs

Yes, that's one of the pieces we want to improve for v2. The board loads topics in batches of ten, but we wanted people to be able to jump quickly to the topic that you choose in the table of contents. So we load the topic that you jumped to, but if you scroll up from there, then we have to load another batch.

In that situation, it should leave you at the bottom of the newly-loaded topics, so that it feels like you're still in the same place on the board. The current version pops you up to the top of the new set, which feels disjointed, like you said. We'll be working on this over the next few weeks.

I'm glad you mentioned it -- it was one of those pieces that made us say, "When we work on this, is anyone going to notice or care?" It's good to know that you did, thanks. :)

Reply to "New feature: Table of Contents"

Are you sure you want to leave this page?

Reply • 2 comments •
2
Whatamidoing (WMF)talk contribs

Steps to reproduce:

1) Type something into the "Start a new topic box". 2) Press the Return key. 3) See "Are you sure you want to leave this page? You have unsubmitted changes on this page. Are you sure you want to navigate away and lose your work?"

"Return" in that context should probably either post a message-free subject heading, or it should behave like tabbing and take me to the message box.


Also, the 'Post a new message to "{{PAGENAME}}"' box is usually just one line tall when I start typing (Safari 6.2.2, Mac OS 10.8.5, Vector).

Quiddity (WMF)talk contribs

That erroneous confirmation is phab:T86286, and seems to be Mac-specific. I've added your details.

The multiline-text-areas occasionally not expanding, is now filed as phab:T86873.

Thanks. :)

Reply to "Are you sure you want to leave this page?"

Is it possible to link to an uncreated section

Reply • 5 comments •
5
Christian75talk contribs

As subjct says; is that possible?

Quiddity (WMF)talk contribs

If I understand correctly, you want to link to an equivalent of "&section=new" ? That feature is planned, at phab:T59989.

SPage (WMF)talk contribs

What do you want?

  • phab:T59989 asks for Flow boards to respond to an API request to add the wikitext of a new section. You can't link to that, it's the kind of thing a bot does.
  • If you're asking for the equivalent of the [Add topic] tab on talk pages, Flow pages could respond to the same ?action=edit&section=new in the query string by focusing input in the "Start a new topic" input field.
  • If you just want a link that scrolls to the "Start a new topic" input field, that field doesn't have an id tag so a link could target e.g. #flow-new-topic. Since there's only one of these forms this seems reasonable (and easy).
  • If you want to have a link that opens up the new topic form and pre-fills it with e.g. "Another great suggestion...", then it's doable in JavaScript ($('.flow-newtopic-form .mw-ui-input').focus() ...) and if there's a good use case for it then Flow could support query string parameters that trigger this.
  • There's no way to know what the UUID of a new topic will be, it varies with time. So you can't write "Go see my [[Topic:S9ftya9qaez67kjo | Genius Idea]] until you add the new topic (and then copy its permalink).

It turns out that linking to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sandbox?action=new-topic might be what you want. You get a standalone form to add a topic (see result). This query string isn't officially supported; it's a side effect of every Flow action being permitted from the query string. So even if it's possible to improve this behavior it seems low priority.

Ebernhardsontalk contribs

actually the action=new-topic is officially supported, its part of the no-js compatibility.

Sänger S.Gtalk contribs

probably only if you can guess this cryptic and user-unfriendly mumbo-jumbo in the url ;)

Reply to "Is it possible to link to an uncreated section"

Thank (bug report)

Reply • 5 comments •
5
Be..anyonetalk contribs

When I click on "history" for, e.g., Talk:Phabricator/Help I get an almost ordinary history page without [thank] links. Please fix this (skin monobook, almost all gadgets disabled, Chrome for a few last NPAPI weeks, various sites incl. FB + doubleclick resolved as 127.0.0.1, no 3rd party cookies, central notes etc. AdBlocked, the works.)

Quiddity (WMF)talk contribs

There are [thank] links directly within the flow posts, so do we really need them in the history page, too? I believe they purposefully didn't add them there, to reduce the clutter. I'm not sure if it's better to have more clutter or more consistency...?

However, we do need a way to [thank] for post-edits. I'll file that as phab:T85846. Thanks!

Jdforrester (WMF)talk contribs

They're intentionally also available on diff pages as well as the history page, so I'd say yes, it's designed and expected that there are two routes to thanking users for contributions.

Quiddity (WMF)talk contribs

Ok, filed as phab:T85945

Jdforrester (WMF)talk contribs

Thanks!

Reply to "Thank (bug report)"

Flow on this talk page and table of contents

Reply • 3 comments •
3
Dan Polanskytalk contribs

Flow has been enabled on this talk page about Flow before table of contents in Flow is ready and before a decent search or filtering facility is ready. This, combined with the fact that https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Flow does not load the entire Flow history of discussions, makes it hard to see what has already been discussed. Promises that developers "are working" on table of contents are as old as 6 October 2014, as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Archive_13#Table_of_Contents.3F (Yes, Wikipedia has a discussion about Flow that actually uses working and proven technology making it possible to find things, unlike this discussion page about Flow.) A request for a table of contents in Flow is as old as 11 October 2013 as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Archive_6#Please_provide_indexing_.22table-of-contents.22-like_functionality. Why anyone enabled this half-baked semifunctional Flow discussion system on Talk:Flow is beyond me. He who assumes that a dicussion about Flow is important should not thwart the discussion by hosting it in a broken discussion system. I do not know whether there is any way back, but if there is, using classic talk pages on Talk:Flow should be seriously considered.

Quiddity (WMF)talk contribs

They're (1 developer) still working on the Table of Contents, along with many other things. It should be ready for release next week (during the normal wikitech:deployments schedule, so Wednesday). We can see the ongoing development version at this test wiki. They're also nearing completion on some of the main Search functionality.

They enabled it early, so that editors and developers who are interested in assisting during the creation can take part at all stages. They enabled it in places that have volunteered to test it out, so that the development is constantly informed by real-world scenarios and feedback.

Sänger S.Gtalk contribs

Hey, it's only one and a half year in the making, why do you expect more than this half-baked forum impersonation after such a short time?

After all, they promise us the blue from the sky for this new pet project of the WMF head honchos, once they had the time to spend the multi-millions in their pockets for serious programming.

Reply to "Flow on this talk page and table of contents"

User expectations and evidence

Reply • 1 comment •
1
Dan Polanskytalk contribs

About "We believe that user expectations for a modern discussion system are increasingly diverging from the reality of talk pages today": Where can I find evidence to support the above belief? In particular, are the expectations really increasingly diverging, and how do you know it? If you have such evidence, can you please link to it directly from the Flow page, so that the quoted belief statement does not appear to be someone's unsourced opinion?

Reply to "User expectations and evidence"