- You mean it's supposed to look like this Image:AngelaBox.jpg on mozilla, but on MSIE you want the box to be like Image:AngelaBox2.jpg? -- JeLuF 22:14, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I was assuming it looked like the Mozilla one on both. I hadn't checked it (oops). Any way of fixing it? Angela 22:28, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I removed it. It's a bug. :) I thought it looked nice, but I guess a way to do that without using Mozilla bugs is needed. Angela 16:51, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I like sansculottes' type B and I like angela's ones. -- da didi, german wikipedia
What I would like to see is a 'caption' tag that can be used for non-thumbnail images with captions. It would look the same as whatever the default thumbnail box would look like, except there would be no magifying lense. This is what the syntax would be: [[Image:Henry8.jpg|caption|100px|center|Henry VIII]] --mav 04:41, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I agree, this would be a very useful feature.-El.
- Yes, please, that would be great! --denny 23:42, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Is there any way of putting raw HTML tags on a page? In my design, some CSS attributes are attached directly to <img> tags, so I can't use [[Image:...]] thingie. It seems to allow <div> tags, but inserts <a> and <img> as plain text :( -- Paul Pogonyshev 22:03, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- You don't need <a> or <img> tags. Just type the url without the tags and it will work. For example, http://meta.wikipedia.org/upload/wiki.png would show an image so you don't need <img src="http://meta.wikipedia.org/upload/wiki.png">. Angela 22:56, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- some CSS attributes are attached directly to <img> tags -- Paul Pogonyshev
OK, I solved this by adding dummy <div>'s around <img>'s. So the code in the page looks quite different from posted CSS + HTML now.
Whatever the default appearance is, there needs to be a way to make the background white and suppress the frame; for postage stamps all of the box ideas create vibrating frames that distract from the stamp itself, and alter perception of the stamp's colors. Stan Shebs 07:18, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
no border pleaseEdit
Can we have a candidate where there is no border around the thumbnail, just a magnifying glass next to the caption? I really like the idea of adding the caption to the [[..|..]] thingy. -- Kimiko 17:24, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- --Maio 18:11, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Paul's design in a few browsersEdit
I think it's quite attractive, but we'd want to find and fix the indentation issue in IE/Win. IE/Mac doesn't move the magnifying glass up but it won't look wrong to a random visitor. Netscape 4 is a lost cause. :) --Brion VIBBER 23:01, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'd like to see the choice of thumbnailed image appearance as a user preference. Has this been brought up before? --Spikey 03:13, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Where can we vote?Edit
Where can we show support for the version we like. I like the Sansculotte version A with the square bubbles rather than the magnifying glass and the small text inside the box. - Texture 04:35, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- The vote hasn't started yet. The 15th was the date suggested by JeLuF. Fabiform 02:12, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The current implementation does not workEdit
Currently the magnifier image is missing. This is wrong in Mozilla, Firefox, IE6 and Opera. GerardM 15:07, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Reload. --Brion VIBBER
Problem with thumbnailed picturesEdit
When a big picture is presented in a small frame, the idea is that when you enlarge, that you get the picture only bigger and fitting best on the screen. This is what "Media:" does. With the thumb, I get the article and when the picture is really big, it does not fit the screen.
The argument "the picture is too big" is imho not valid. The reason is that a quality picture that is put into the public domain SHOULD be good, this way it can get usage that would be otherwise impossible like screenbackground etc.
Thanks, GerardM 07:21, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I have been informed that the Opera browser does not behave like IE and Mozilla with regards to the image implementation. Is this an Opera feature ??
Don't vote ambigiously, sillies!Edit
For those who vote for a suggestion but add (with extra fries) or (switching this to that, ofcourse) to their votes: You are ambigious. There has been plenty of time for you to construct a suggestion where you get what you want. We now have so many different suggestions, because we are supposed to vote for exactly what we want, not : I like this one very much, except the lower half. duh. Sverdrup (talk) 14:50, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Heh, I think the enlarge image/text should be a seperate vote from the layout..
Noldoaran 17:37, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
It turns out that this isn't displaying the same way in all browsers (what I shock!). Here's what it looks like for me (IE 6, Win 2000). Fabiform 18:42, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
And this is what it looks like for Dori in firefox 0.8:
- In w:Camino too. Both are Geckos, and we should care about those. Sverdrup (talk) 19:03, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Same for Netscape 7.02 on Mac Sys 9.1. Elf 01:38, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Not hard to fix. Just put "<div style="clear:both"></div>" directly after the enlarge icon.
- like so:
Final variants phaseEdit
I think that there should be a final, one week design phase for the two winning designs. It is clear from the comments on this page that people have additional thoughts about the current options, and would like to see more variants to vote on, and it is also clear that some options are unpopular (e.g. icons on the border line). I suggest that this input is used for creating variants of the two top designs, and another one week voting phase is used to make the final decision on these variants. They should be voted on individually.
As this will probably stick for months to come, we better get it right the first time.—Eloquence 18:05, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)
French users have been very surprised to discover thumbnailed images. They do not remember discussions about them. Will this vote also impact the way the thumbnailes images will look like in our wikipedia, or just on en ? Shall I call the voters ? :-) Anthere 21:04, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Don't know really, as every version is autonomous of each other. Perhaps the French Wikipedia should hold a vote on their Wikipedia and the English Wikipedia hold the vote on their version? --Maio 21:12, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Dunno if this may be autonomous or not ? Anthere 05:31, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- It may not.—Eloquence 19:13, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
It must be some time ago that the French were surprised about thumbnail images. They use some of the thumbnail features since at least March 1 on their main page. -- JeLuF 21:37, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
What I like least about the whole "thumbnail" concept is the fact that these images do not take any tags for the captions. It may be not possible to allow this. However I did like to see captions in italics ('' tags) and smaller (<small></small> tags) print. I'm especially concerned that italics may not be used for species names in captions (nor underlined text which would be the proper alternative). If there is a way to solve this problem, I could support the concept. I've voted for my "favorites", but given a choice, I'd scrap the whole idea (unless the caption problem can be solved). - Marshman 00:08, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Markup of the image caption (links, emphasis, etc) will be part of the next MediaWiki-release. -- JeLuF 22:53, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The way of displaying a photoEdit
The talk about the style of the icon is not very important. The usefulness of this function is. The old way is to upload 2 pictures, a small and a big picture and to enter a direct link to the big picture in the article. This way the big picture is displayed good on the screen. But when you use the new system you go to the description-page. That is a page for the description of the picture but not for displaying. It does not look good that way because of all the menu's. Clicking on the icon must go to a special "view image" page whiteout any menu's or maybe only a "Back to article" button. Walter 10:50, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- What is it that you want? The image itself displayed alone on your browser page? You can get that for any version of the image by selecting from the Image history section: you click on the appropriate timestamp to get the image uploaded at that time. Maybe it could be organised such that the image itself was linked to the latest version of this (i.e. click on the image and have it displayed all alone in the browser)? --Phil 13:07, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- When you use the image followed by media syntax, in some browsers IE, Firefox not Mozilla and Opera, you get a full page picture. This is enough. That a wikipedian is able to get all kinds of information is not that relevant as we do not make wikipedia for ourselves. A good user interface will enlarge the picture and not bother you with detail information that is not relevant to a USER. GerardM 22:56, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
New thumbnail look broken in SafariEdit
The third thumbnail example on the page (the one with no caption) is broken in Safari. The lower border doesn't go under the "expand" icon. Here's what it looks like:
--Spikey 18:41, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
It is broken in Firefox 0.8 as well. It looks like you addressed it above, though, and just didn't update the example? - Omegatron 19:45, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Haven't been following this at all, but love the new look. When might it be activated on English Wikipedia? 184.108.40.206 03:05, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)