Topic on Talk:Requests for comment/Scoping site CSS

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Amire80 (talkcontribs)

nv.wiki is given as an example of a negative customization. This is a bit sad, because it is actually one of the nicest examples of customization. Not just because it is beautiful - that's a matter of taste - but because it shows a real need that some communities have: To customize their wiki to show something of their culture and to make it more comfortable, but without making a whole new skin. Because you know what happens when a new skin is made, right? - The developers, quite rightly, don't want to support it, and bam: VisualEditor doesn't work.

Arabic had a comparable cultural customization in the past, but the introduction of Vector broke it.

A clever separation of styles that takes into account the communities' needs for cultural customization without getting in the way of introducing new technologies is the way to go.

Jdlrobson (talkcontribs)

It was I that brought up nv wiki. I agree it's a great example of customisation and self expression however my main concerns lie around interface elements for users that flick between languages. Selected tabs change colours and the menus look different - user interfaces can be hard to learn and if things look somewhat different within the same problem this creates huge user experience problems.

I agree that people should be able to customise skins more easily but MediaWiki:Common.css is a terribly bad way of doing it. It leads to rules like this

#foo bar a {
  color: blue;
}
#foo bar a {
  color: #ccc;
}

where the first rule is overwritten in the css cascade. Ideally there should just be one rule:

#foo bar a {
  color: #ccc;
}
Arthur Rubin (talkcontribs)

That's an argument against using global (Wikimedia-wide) css, not against local MW:Common.css.

Reply to "Major customizations"