I think the change to make the site use serif is incorrect. .body will affect all elements with a class of "body". I don't think any elements match this criteria. I also don't think we should just make arbitrary changes to CSS without discussion. And I'm not convinced it's a good idea anyway. <LordBiro>/<Talk> 21:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Not really nuts about a serif myself. Mouse over and the status bar will tell you the user name and such with a... semi-serif I guess you could call it. So you can see "l" vs "I" and such. Would it be possible to do some kind of check on registration to see if similar looking letters match an existing user name? —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 22:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Bleh, turned out it was supposed to be "body", not ".body". Anyways, I've changed it to apply to only the firstheading. And I can't really tell the difference in the status-bar's upper i vs lower L. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 23:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
BTW, if you guys want to discuss about removing serf from first heading, I'll abstain and follow the opinion of the group. My judgment may be compromised because I was a direct victim of the impersonation attack. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 23:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
It looks meh. How useful would it be? I'm using Firefox and it shows all the info I need in the status bar and address bar. So the main place I can see this being useful for me would be a scan of RC and figuring out total impersonations like the guy who copied MP's name and page (idk if a serif would have helped that one.). In most cases, its quite apparent from the contributions that its not the original user. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 23:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Imo it's good to have this in the main heading to avoid similiar problems. And it looks sort of cool too. :) -- (gem / talk) 23:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I could get used to the header. If you do it to the entire body, I'd swap my preferences back. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 23:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
From GuildWiki talk:Community Portal[]
Serif font on a screen?[]
Serif[]
The general gist is:
Serif - PRINTED body text
San-Serif - screen fonts
reason?
Serifs on screen make text illegible and bad for reading if the reader has a) poor eye sight, b) has a CRT monitor, c) has low resolution with no anti-aliasing (eg size 10 serifed on 100% on MS windows is considered poor quality)
and if you still insist on using Serifs for a default screen font that post dates the late 90's, then go and get yourself a set of government guildlines and standards for screen and print layout.
A general rule IF you use serifs is that
Size 8 san-serif = size 10 serif
size 10 san-serif - sized 12 san-serifed font
This is also why a large software vender starting with M had to change their default font size from 10 to 12 for their serifed fonts in things like (insert company name) word.
The general gist is:
Serif - PRINTED body text
San-Serif - screen fonts
reason?
Serifs on screen make text illegible and bad for reading if the reader has a) poor eye sight, b) has a CRT monitor, c) has low resolution with no anti-aliasing (eg size 10 serifed on 100% on MS windows is considered poor quality)
and if you still insist on using Serifs for a default screen font that post dates the late 90's, then go and get yourself a set of government guildlines and standards for screen and print layout.
A general rule IF you use serifs is that
Size 8 sans-serif = size 10 serif
size 10 sans-serif - sized 12 san-serifed font
This is also why a large software vender starting with M had to change their default font size from 10 to 12 for their serifed fonts in things like (insert company name) word.
My general gripe is, WTF are you thinking? Veldrik 23:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
So it is changing TO Serif? Bad call in my opinion. My eyesight is horrible and I have enough trouble reading some of the text around here as it is. Serif font would be reason for me to stop using Wiki. I hope you all will reconsider. ----23:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
We are discussing it MediaWiki talk:Common.css. Keep in mind that everyone can edit their own personal style sheet so that you use your own fonts if you don't like whatever is decided. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 23:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, is it possible to only use serif on the title/header? (ex: "GuildWiki talk:Community Portal" for this page)-- (Talk) (Contr.) 23:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Thus far, that's what it is right now — kyrasantae 23:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
The point is that the font with the POOR legibility should NEVER be the default. I'll copy this to the MediaWiki talk:Common.css aswell since it's more important to have a legible screen that won't push users away from the site, than a site with "prettyfied" fonts and round corners on tables. Veldrik 00:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Cut and pasted (including comments) from GuildWiki talk:Community Portal - Please add comments outside of the box :) keeps it lookin pretty, cause it's always about looking good - thats the real reason we learn martial arts, to protect our lovely looks
Veldrik 00:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, right off the bat, definitely not about prettiness. Its current use is to stem the tide of incoming vandals who are using names like PansoIa and SkuId which look like Pansola and Skuld without the serifs. I think that most people would be against going for an all out font change. The current heading seems okay. Since we're still discussing it, I'm gonna take down the notice. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 00:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I think that if we can distinguish vandals with the heading only we should stop there, Serif gives me headache.--ìğá†ħŕášħ 00:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, there is no reason to implement this for otehr text than page headings. -- (gem / talk) 00:37, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I will say one positive thing though - headers look pretty with it :) (the larger ones atleast - see above example). Not to much text, and the font size is large enough that without anti-aliasing it still looks pretty. Not as legible without emboldment however, or for the smaller ===header===. I miss times new roman :( I use to use it so much until i had to study style guidelines and industry standards and stuff :( If only i was a Type-setter instead of an engineer/programmer, then i could use serifs all the time :) Veldrik 00:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Umm, am I missing something here? Only the page titles are using the new font on my screen. -- (gem / talk) 00:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
A font change, which can have a significant visual effect to everyone's visiting experience to this site, should not have been implemented until after a method was provided for users to retain the original font design if they so wished. Indeed, perhaps those that wanted a new font design could have implemented a personal stylesheet while leaving the default setting as the default. Just a thought. --Wolfie (talk|contribs) 00:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, for those of you just joining us... the font was never fully changed to a serif. That screenshot was done using one of my firefox plugins to preview it. The only thing that is changed is the font used on the page heading. Is there anyone who currently has an issue with just that change? —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 01:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
The date of the original post was when it was stated that the DEFAULT text would be Seriffed. This was before the heading only thing. Veldrik 02:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I have no issue with the new headers, I think it's a good idea. It's also worth noting when I read what Gem had written (incoming vandals who are using names like PansoIa and SkuId which look like Pansola and Skuld without the serifs) I was momentarily baffled. I didn't even realize it was a problem before now. As a user with an l in my name, I wholeheartedly support seriffed headers! 18:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I have issues with the new headers and I will be editing my personal stylesheets to revert to the original...I think the font is fugly and it is hard to read. Maybe I am just too used to the old headers. In any case, the issue of ascertaining vandals isn't enough a compelling reason for me, since I have the tools to check such things without undermining the appearance of pages. But I appreciate the effort PanSola, since it was for a good cause. (T/C) 03:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
How would that help with vandals anyway? --Gimmethegepgun 04:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
This is the CSS file that is loaded for everyone regardless of what skin they are on. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 04:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
That globe.....[]
Is owned by the Wikimedia foundation and is only allowed to be used by one of Wikipedia's sister projects (see the copyright description here). Are we considered one of Wikipedia's sister projects? If not then the image is a CopyVio :P --Shadowphoenix 23:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
It's a copyrighted image. I want to attempt to claim fairuse. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 23:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
.noClears[]
I'd like to rename .noClears to .clearnone if it is kept, because that is less confusing. --◄mendel► 03:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
bodyContent pos relative problems[]
Setting bodyContent position relative screws up the positioning of Wikia's Editing Tips in the Monaco skin )-: -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 00:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
While the above problem has been fixed, I have also discovered that the positioning of Wikia's autocomplete box also got significantly displaced by bodyContent's position:relative. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 23:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Argh. Ok. And the fix to the above problem makes the editing tips disappear in IE7? Ok. The solution then is to make the body position rule not trigger on editpages, or overide it back to normal on these? Would that solve it? --◄mendel► 03:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
That sounds right, though eitherway that might require a javascript solution (or getting Wikia to add another class into the BODY tag when in edit mode). -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 03:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
It also means that the langugae links must not be displayed when the body position rule is not in effect or they'd obscure the buttons again. --◄mendel► 03:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
STDT and sortable[]
The Template:STDT and class="sortable" appear incompatible. Could someone with appropriate access take a look? See here for an example of the current work-around. Thanks! — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 06:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Do not use template:stdt, it is deprectaed. Use class="stdt sortable". --◄mendel► 19:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
STDT is no more? (yuck: thinking of all the pages that use STDT instead of class=) Anyhow, will do. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 21:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
You've not actually looked at Template:STDT, have you? It's been dead for a long time and replaced by a cunning simulacrum. --◄mendel► 21:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC) {{subst:STDT}} is fine. ;-)
Ah, I've been looking at the doppelganger of STDTs past, I guess. Anyhow, that is still a lot of pages using STDT. And, if memory serves, doesn't the style guide still reference STDT? — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 21:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Which one? I've looked at the editing guide and S&F, but neither had it. --◄mendel► 21:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
You're right; it was only there in my memory. (Which probably didn't distinguish between Template:STDT and class=.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 00:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
class=qr vs. stdt[]
The qr class seems to be out-of-synch with the stdt at this point. e.g. Damage conversion skills quick reference vs crafting materials, by artisan. (Spacing, distinguishing characteristics of header rows and other header types, etc.) Is it worth tinkering a bit? Or, better, to make qr dependent on stdt so they change together? Or, leave well-enough alone? (My thought: stdt looks professional; qr looks a couple of years out-of-date.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:47, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
stdt table
Header
Cell
Cell with text in it
qr table
Header
Cell
Cell with text in it
stdt qr table
Header
Cell
Cell with text in it
I agree that a consistent look is preferable, however, the difference seems to mainly consist in the width, header alignment, and border style? Only the latter of which would need to be assimilated, IMHO, and I don't even thing that the stdt border is the better-looking one. --◄mendel► 20:19, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
Please also don't forget that you are using a modified version of stdt , see User:Tennessee_Ernie_Ford/monaco.css. --◄mendel► 20:23, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
Not forgetting the specialness of my own stdt, I do prefer the border, shading, alignment, etc of the overall stdt table. However, I take your reply as leave well enough alone. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 22:48, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
I don't see any shading, except on the border, and since none of the lines on our other user interface elements have it, it seems out of place to me.
I agree that the left-aligned headers on the QRs are probably better off centered.
My reply was more to be taken as a "What are you talking about?" ;) --◄mendel► 23:13, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
Erm, sigh. (There's an argument to be made about considering a style overhaul, but you won't catch me making it anytime soon.) (TEF goes back to the wiki-drawing board.) — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:46, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
I'm left with the feeling that I didn't really understand what you wanted to tell us. --◄mendel► 09:28, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
) 23:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
(gem / talk) 23:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
