Extension talk:RevisionSlider/2016

This is the feedback page for the RevisionSlider extension.

Read about what we've learned about creating a RTL-accessible extension. Please report all RTL-related issues on this talk page!

A great extension

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi, I just wanted to say that I'm really satisfied. This extension is very useful and comfortable.

BTW, why not enable it here on MediaWiki.org? Guycn2 (talk) 23:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Guycn2, thank you, it's really great to hear that! About Mediawiki.org: We're going to talk about next steps soon. I know that it's maybe unusual to start with a set of Wikipedias, but it's mainly a feature for editors and we wanted to see if it works well for editors in their normal daily work first. But yes, Mediawiki.org would be a good thing :) Best, Birgit Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 19:30, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree turning it on for mediawiki.org would be great! mw.org is usually one of the first sites to get new features, along side testwiki etc. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 23:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

May I open a phabricator request to turn it on here? Or there should be more consensus? Guycn2 (talk) 17:23, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

It got enabled here, as a betafeature, last night (as usually things are enabled here alongside testwiki etc.)! ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 09:18, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Guycn2 (talk) 12:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

slow start / too much scrolling to content

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Imo it takes to long to load and takes too much space for beeing always active. It might be useful if it could be enabled i.e. through the "More" tab though, or at least then it wouldn't annoy me even if I don't want to use it :-) <small>(Writing this manly because I misunderstood our local wiki's announcement as if this would be enabled for anyone in the next days)</small> --Nenntmichruhigip (talk) 15:48, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your comment. I have questions :) - do you experience it that way when you go to the version history to compare two revisions? Or when you're following a link to a diff and you expect to only see the normal diff view? When would you want to use the feature? About your <small>fears</small>: We're in the very first phase of gathering feedback for RevisionSlider-the-beta-feature, and no, it won't be just enabled for everyone in the next days ;) You can also follow the updates on dewiki. Main discussions or planned changes will always be announced in the Kurier and elsewhere. Regular smaller updates you can find on WP:Technische Wünsche/Topwünsche. Thanks again for your useful feedback. I won't be around for some weeks, so it takes a while until I can answer again. But my team colleagues will also read this page. Best, Birgit Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 20:11, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Firstly sorry for the delayed response, I somehow haven't seen your answer until I just stumbled upon it. My issues seem to be resolved now that RevisionSlider has to be expanded first.

Honestly: I don't see much use in the feature for myself. I can imagine others might find it useful though, so I'm more like "just make it in a way it dosen't disturb those not wanting it". You did a resonably good job at this now :-)

I'd prefer if it could be made even smaller when collapsed, i.e. on the right side of #contentSub. But that might lead to bad user experience when expanding and recollapsing. Maybe the collapsed header going to that currently unused (or is it?) space and the header staying something like 33% width even when expanded. Anyway: It is small enough now, so it's really not that important. Nenntmichruhigip (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thanks a lot for your response and also for the compliment :-) About the size: I guess it would be too small then ... - but good to hear that the feature is not disturbing anymore to you the way it is now.

I would now mark this conversation as resolved - but feel free to re-open it in case you see that differently. Hope to see you around on dewiki! Best, Birgit Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 17:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

CSS

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The class ".mw-revslider-show-help" has the prop "right" with value "-18px". This causes (@ de.WP) horizontal scrolling (content is wider than 100% of window.innerHeight).

Values >= "-14px" do avoid it.

Greetings, de.WP:User:Messerjokke79 178.12.147.53 (talk) 15:57, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi there! I have copied your report to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T141461 ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 17:57, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

mouse-over Info boxes

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The mouse-over Info boxes partly hide i.e. the flagging-form. Please consider showing them beyond the slide, not above, because it might be easier to mouse-out. 178.12.147.53 (talk) 16:07, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi! by 'Info boxes' do you mean the tool tips that appear when you hover over a revision in the slider? These display the summary, user, date etc.

As a result of working on phab:T141071 the tool tips will be displayed underneath the slider.

This should be deployed to dewiki on Wednesday the 3rd of August! ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 18:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

This is right: so for example if you want to "sight" (is this the English word for "sichten" (de)?) an article, this is very irritating and it steals your time. TheTokl (talk) 12:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Confusing ui

It is not clear what happen, ie. which one is the first revision and which one is the last. Now you can make a diff over a single revision, but that does not really make sense.

The arrow (triangles) now points towards each other, but they should point in the direction of the time dimension. Ie. they should me oriented horizontally and not vertically.

Clicking on the vertical bars to get a diff is confusing. You can move the arrows but has to click on the bars to get the diff? And then that moves the arrows? Jeblad (talk) 09:10, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jeblad, thanks for your feedback! For context, could you tell me if you are talking about the arrows at the side of the revisionSlider, allowing you to move in time? Or do you mean the arrows pointing at revisions, indicating which ones are the ones you have currently selected?

Concerning the changing of revisions, this is the current behavior: If you move the pointers on the diffs, it changes the revision once you let go of the pointer. Alternatively, if you don't want to move the pointers, you can click on a bar and change the revision that way. Does that answer your question? Lea Voget (WMDE) (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Days and seen diffs

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello!

I use that very useful extension and I have two suggestions that would make it more efficient:

• see days in the timeline. Not exact days, but just a marker indicating when two changes are not at the same day. It would be helpful for quick search (what happen during the three previous days)
• highlight diffs I haven't seen since my last visit

Thanks! Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 13:59, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! I created two phabricator tickets for that:

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T136104

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T142184

Could you check them to make sure the reason why you are wishing for the features is correctly explained there? Lea Voget (WMDE) (talk) 10:19, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Done, thanks! Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Popup partly off screen

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

When the popup is very wide, it may be shown partly off screen. To avoid this, the popup could be centered on screen (Phab:T142012). FriedhelmW (talk) 17:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there! Please see my comment on at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T142012#2519860! ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 23:05, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Touch screen

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

How do I get the tool tip without moving the pointers (triangles) using a touch screen? FriedhelmW (talk) 20:50, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

That's a very good question. I created a ticket for it and we will look into it!

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T142185 Lea Voget (WMDE) (talk) 10:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@FriedhelmW can you tell us which device you were using when interacting with the revision slider? Thank you :) Lea Voget (WMDE) (talk) 19:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Sure. I'm using a notebook with a 15" touch screen. Google Chrome on W10. FriedhelmW (talk) 20:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

@FriedhelmWthanks for the details!

We have now investigated the revision slider on mobile, and are in the process of fixing bugs. The issue of not being able to see tooltips by hovering on touch screens is an interesting one. For the moment, however, we decided to first see if the revision slider is wanted as a feature. If this is the case, we will do another round of improving the touchscreen experience of the revision slider. Lea Voget (WMDE) (talk) 08:43, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Change size wrong

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

When I point the mouse to the leftmost revision, in the tooltip the value for "Change size" is wrong. It is always shown as equal to "Page size". FriedhelmW (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there.

I have just checked and everything looks correct to me. If you are referring to the very first revision (the one that creates the article) then the change size should be equal to the page size. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 17:40, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

No, the leftmost revision is not the very first. Checked again on dewiki. FriedhelmW (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Have a look at this: https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=152425751&oldid=151585132&title=Wikipedia:Hauptseite FriedhelmW (talk) 19:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

We just had another look and it looks like the issue you describe that is currently happening on dewiki will be fixed by the deployment that will happen this evening.

The issue has already been fixed on master and you should be able to head to test.wikipedia.org to try it out now! ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 08:47, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok now, thank you! FriedhelmW (talk) 20:21, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Immer aktiv

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Das Tool ist an sich ganz praktisch und funktioniert auch gut. Nur braucht es immer ein bisschen Zeit zum Laden, verschiebt dann den Artikel mit entsprechender Verzögerung nach unten und nimmt recht viel Platz ein. Und das, wo ich es nur in seltenen Fällen wirklich brauche. Meist will ich mir doch nur eine einzelne Änderung anschauen. Ich fände es daher besser, wenn das Tool nicht automatisch bei jeder Änderungsansicht aktiv ist, sondern über einen Button erst aktiviert und geladen wird. Don-kun (talk) 09:20, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

(sorry for answering in English) Thanks for the feedback. The feature you have mentioned has actually already been implemented (see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T141871) and should be deployed on German Wikipedia (and other wikis) Thursday evening! Leszek Manicki (WMDE) (talk) 07:16, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I looked wrong on the calender. It will be on German Wikipedia on Thursday not tomorrow! Leszek Manicki (WMDE) (talk) 08:45, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

So revision slider is now collapsed by default, ie. only takes around 30 pixels above the diff before it gets expanded (opened) Leszek Manicki (WMDE) (talk) 06:43, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bar diagram ratios are inaccurate and thus a bit misleading

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hey, I just tried this feature on the German Wikipedia. Overall, it looks pretty cool.

However, a bit of feedback: I was looking for a rather big change which I knew existed for the article in question. I expected to be able to see it easily at first glance, however, it took me some time to locate it as the bar of the change I had in mind was barely any bigger than the much smaller changes surrounding it. To illustrate what I mean, here's a quick screenshot comparison I made:

https://i.imgur.com/Gy8XNpd.png

The first change on the top of the image adds about 6300 bytes to the article while the second bar only adds about 330 bytes, which is only 5% compared to the first change. Yet, the first bar is only slightly bigger than the second one and in no way represents the 6000 byte (a factor of over 20x) difference in size. I would suggest that you guys tweak this behavior, I understand that you do not want the graph to be messed up by really big changes - however, I would argue that these kinds of changes are often the more interesting milestones in the history of an article and should be clearly visible (either through better ratios or additional hints such as differently colored bars or something like that). ThatGerman (talk) 15:15, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi @ThatGerman, thanks for the feedback!

Right now, we scale the change with the biggest addition to maximum revision slider height. We use a logarithmic scale to define the bar size of all the other changes. This is the best way we've found so far to have a reliable revision slider height on the one hand, and not let small revisions disappear, because they are so much smaller than the biggest addition. So far, we have not found a better way to deal with this tradeoff. We will keep your feedback in mind, however, that really big changes need to be found quickly and that the revision slider in its current state does not necessarily fully meet this need. Lea Voget (WMDE) (talk) 16:03, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Lea, thanks for getting back to me, much appreciated, I see your point. I will keep an eye on this extension's development in any case! ThatGerman (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Translation

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi, section "Installation" couldn't be translated because it doesn't appears, could somebody fix it? Thanks. Elisardojm (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Elisardojm, thanks for the translations! The "Installation" section is a separate template that may be used for multiple extensions. It seems that it has not been translated for your language yet, but you could do it here: [1] That should do the trick! Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 10:55, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Done! Elisardojm (talk) 13:19, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Persian wikivoyage

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

we use this extension in Persian wikivoyage , Thanks AFlorence (talk) 14:31, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Looks like 2 people are using it there, yes. Let us know how it goes. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 15:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

yes , this is good extension , and i also test and use this in fa.wikipedia , and translate this extension in translatewiki.net to farsi lang , Thanks AFlorence (talk) 17:43, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi AFlorence, thanks again for the fast translation to farsi! :-) Happy to hear that you find the RevisionSlider useful. Best, Birgit Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 17:00, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Patrolled edits, bots

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Is it possible to mark edits that are made by bots and edits that are already ptrolled? 'cause finding the last patrolled review is really hard. 37.110.144.255 (talk) 17:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for your feedback!

I created Phabricator tickets: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T147012 (patrolled edits)

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T147014 (bot edits)

Could you tell a bit more about why you would like to have the bot edits marked? Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm a patroller, and when I see bot-made edit, I realise that it's OK and I can omit revising it (and that's me above, really) Cat of the Six (talk) 19:38, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Hey @Cat of the Six,

thanks! Just to be sure that I fully understood you - Do you usually patrol by checking changes in articles on your watchlist and then you go to the diff page and navigate with the RevisionSlider through the last edits? Or do you patrol by checking recent changes? Could you describe your normal workflow a bit? At what point would you use the RevisionSlider in your work as a patroller? Best, Birgit Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 13:40, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, I have several big (1-3k) categories that I usually patroll, so I scan "Special:Pending changes" for that category and I follow links (I don't know how they're called in English) between time and size of change. Than I see every article, if difference in diff is small and is not breaking rooles, structure and there is no comlicated syntax change, I patroll it without looking; oterwise I look throgh the whole article to be confident that it's all OK. So when I see a bot-made change, I just skip it (If bot is respecable). It helps when bot does wikification (~30 lines per page) after a pearson, I can check only pearson's change wich is usually very small.

Also, thanks for Phabricator tickets!

Best, Cat of the Six Cat of the Six (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Cat of the Six, thanks for your explanation! I added some more information on the reasoning behind your request to the Phabricator ticket.

Best, Birgit Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 13:31, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The slider conflicts with Twinkle？

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

After sliding the slide several times, I find the rollback function of Twinkle (the rollback and rollback[AGF] link.) disappears. This situation occurs in Chinese Wikipedia (zh.wikipedia.org). Tigerzeng (talk) 12:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there!

It sounds like this is the same issue that both the Thanks extension and wikEdDiff ran into!

Take a look at the section "JavaScript Hooks" on the extension doc page Extension:RevisionSlider#JavaScript Hooks ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 12:06, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

I have filed an issue on GitHub for the Twinkle code repository (see https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/issues/360).

I imagine the Twinkle devs will take a look at it over the next days and patch Twinkle and roll out the change. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 16:33, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Tigerzeng (talk) 04:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Option to resize, zoom and change the scale

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I'd like to have more control over the graph: set the size of the RevisionSlider, the number of columns visualized and their scale (logarithmic, linear...). However, great extension! Malore (talk) 16:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

+1. Good idea! FriedhelmW (talk) 17:57, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

+1. Good idea! FriedhelmW (talk) 17:57, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Malore, thanks for your great feedback! :-) I created a Phabricator ticket for your idea, so that we can keep that in mind: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T148190. Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 16:01, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

how could we make this feature better?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

how? Griffin12199 (talk) 14:36, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Griffin12199, welcome to Wikipedia :-). I wish you all the best for your start as an editor. Once you're actively using this feature, I would also be interested in hearing about your experiences :-). I'm closing this topic for now, feel free to reopen it! Best, Birgit Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 12:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Released with deprecated functionality, and how to switch offf?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Page seems to throw a pile of warnings now?

• This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.widget".
• This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.core".
• Use of "Map-values" is deprecated. mw.Map#values is deprecated. Use mw.Map#get() instead.
• OO.ui.WindowManager#addWindows: Windows must have a `name` static property defined.

At least partially caused by this extension and tracked back.

If I do not want to load and execute this JavaScript stuff, where can I configure to be kept in peace? PerfektesChaos (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I have just confirmed that the "Use of "Map-values" is deprecated. mw.Map#values is deprecated. Use mw.Map#get() instead." messages do indeed come from the RevisionSlider. I created a ticket on phabricator and have uploaded https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/323094/ which should resolve these. The other warnings to not appear to come from the RevisionSlider extension.

The RevisionSlider bar loads mostly without JavaScript and currently there is no user option to disable / remove the bar. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 00:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

All these warnings are caused by the RevisionSlider: ext.RevisionSlider.SliderView has a dependency on jquery.ui.draggable (which itself depends on jquery.ui.widget and jquery.ui.core), and ext.RevisionSlider.HelpDialog.js does create a window without a static name. Schnark (talk) 11:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Ahh, indeed RevisionSlider also appears to contribute those deprecation notices, they still appear for me locally with RevisionSlider disabled as other extensions also pump out the same notices.

I have created https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T151448 regarding the HelpDialog windows without a static name. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 11:49, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

WRT deprecated warnings (Thanks @Schnark):

• They occur on pages with no gadgets at all, nothing else than MediaWiki issued stuff, and RevisionSlider is the only thing with a UI, and there has been silence until yesterday.
• Unfortunately they do not permit simple tracking down; if they are caused by something but not directly called it is hard to identify which circumstances are triggering them, by calling something on top.

WRT Opt-Out:

• On every diffpage call the new gadget is unconditionally loading in the background the full history of 20 or whatever previous versions.
• The API calls require about 30 kB of additional traffic, depending on summary lengths.
• This is not acceptable for slow or expensive connections.
• I am interested to see the difference between two particular versions I asked for. If I would like to analyse the history for recent years I will let you know.

On Preferences I can disable VE, MultimediaViewer, and indirectly ULS.

• I can even request on Preferences that I want to see the comparison only without rendered page, for a decade now. Sometimes I make temporarily use of this config for specific maintenance tasks.

I want to get a chance to bail out from this tool asap. PerfektesChaos (talk) 12:21, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

The patch fixing the HelpDialog deprecation note has been merged. This only leaves the jquery.ui.draggable deprecation notice (and the 2 that result from that). jquery.ui.draggable is also still used by other extensions, for example WikiEditor.

The extension is loaded (in the form of the collapsed bar) but the "20 or whatever previous versions" will not be loaded until the user requests to expand the RevisionSlider. This means the additional traffic of the requests is optional. This follows exactly your 4th bullet point. If the user lets the slider know that they want to use it, then it will make the requests and render.

As for a user preference to totally disable the collapsed RevisionSlider bar I have created a ticket on Phabricator to track the request. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 13:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

A patch adding a user option has been merged and will be deployed on Monday the 28th.

A patch moving most of the JS and CSS to be lazy loaded is also now up @ https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/323193 ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 15:35, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Fine; thanks a lot.

I do appreciate lazy loading. I am running 30 gadgets on wikipages, and I preselect depending on circumstances, which of them will be actually triggered, and some are only sniffing and will complete loading and execution after individual request only, or interactive configuration change.

And when I leave city and enjoy German countryside, I have an internet connection slower than in the Australian outback. PerfektesChaos (talk) 18:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Amazing!

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

One thing to add is the ability to click on a specific bar and view the version independently. טוסברהינדי (talk) 19:32, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion! I assume, "independently" means seeing the clicked version only without the diff? Jan Dittrich (WMDE) (talk) 09:13, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. The view of a specific version (a single revision).

Thanks! טוסברהינדי (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Indeed that thing is awesome! 👍

rugk (talk) 15:30, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

@@Rugk, @טוסברהינדי thanks for the great feedback! :-) @Jan Dittrich (WMDE), could you create a Phab ticket for this idea and move it to the "possibly in version 2.0" column, so that we can keep it in mind? Thanks! Birgit Müller (WMDE) (talk) 09:44, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RS was broken on rtl wikis in last deployment

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi. Something happened, and now the RS opening arrow is on the right side of the screen instead of usual left. When clicking, the arrow "jumps" back to the left side. IKhitron (talk) 09:34, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I have filed a bug at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T152913. Thanks for reporting. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 15:40, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 15:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thanks and a little feedback

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Thanks so much to the team from WMDE for making this! I've already used it twice in the last few days to trawl through a page's history and figure out why particular bits of content were added; before I knew about this tool, I might simply have ignored those issues because searching the history would have been too difficult.

I do have a couple comments on the UI. First, it took me a significant amount of time to understand that you click in the lower half of the slider to set the start of the diff, and in the upper half to set the end. For a while, I just clicked somewhat randomly until I got the diff I wanted, which wasn't a great experience.

I think one of the reasons this was confusing was that the vertical axis of the "graph" is already used to indicate addition and removal of content, so I wasn't expecting it to have another meaning as well. Personally, I didn't find the graph very helpful (the edit summaries were much more useful, even though they were harder to access). Partly that may be because the graph isn't to scale; for example, in the history page I'm looking at right now, +11 bytes is about half the height of +364.

Second, when you've got one revision set as the endpoint of a diff, you can't click on the bottom half of that edit to make it the starting point of a new diff. I don't see any reason for that restriction; I would expect clicking in that bottom half to advance the starting point like normal, and advance the ending point by one as well to compensate.

So, all in all, I found the design somewhat unintuitive, but now that I've figured out how to use it, I really like it :) Neil Shah-Quinn (talk) 00:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your great feedback and we're happy that RevisionSlider can help you in your daily work!

What you wrote about your experience with the current UI confirm what we've learned during several usability tests. We have some ideas in mind how to improve these aspects in a next version of the RevisionSlider! Tobias Gritschacher (WMDE) (talk) 09:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Delta-size bars should be positioned between Versions

To me, it seem insensible that the delta-size bars appear upon the version arrows. Because it is a delta, they should be positioned between any two versions. They show the amount of data added during transition from one version to another; any version alone got no sensible delta, as delta is a function of two (adjacent) versions. Bars upon seems sensible, if they stand for the actual size, but not the difference of size. (I don’t want the actual size being displayed – showing deltas is yet absolute reasonable.) -- Pemu (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Can't disable on Wikinews

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I am unable to disable this on Wikinews. And, I also think why to provide an opt-out option (which doesn't work on Wikinews)? Better provide an opt-in option. Agastya (talk) 07:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there!

The RevisionSlider is currently a beta feature on Wikinews.

Click on the 'Beta' link at the top right of the page, scroll down to RevisionSlider and untick the box before saving your preferences.

If this doesn't work then please post back here! ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 17:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I found it. And it is working! Thank you for telling me how to do it. Agastya (talk) 17:51, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.