Talk:GNOME Web/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Enlarged fonts in the main picture

@Editor-1:, I see you wanted to set as page's main picture a screenshot of epiphany with enlarged fonts.

Large fonts are intended for visually impaired people and I can't remember to have ever seen any browser on Wikipedia "default" depicted with accessibility options enabled. This is because large fonts break proportions and make programs "ugly".

If you wanted to show a screenshot with sizes more appropriate for a thumbnail, I think you should instead set an high DPI "UI Scale", which enlarges all the elements of the interface, and not just the fonts.

If you believe we should need an external opinion, I would agree in linking this section on the Web developer mailing list.

Ogoorcs (talk) 14:29, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

more representative screenshot

I have looked at both these screenshots being edit-warred about and think that both need replacing with a better one, more generic, less customized for font scaling, form factor and other changes to the interface. The tablet shot is not typical, either, it should use a non-customized desktop screenshot, showing at least two tabs, like the one at right. - Ahunt (talk) 14:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ahunt: I agree with you and I think your screenshot is better suited to be the main picture at the moment, but I liked Editor-1's idea to pick a screenshot whose elements could be distinguishable even when browsing Wikipedia from a mobile device; that's why I posted a 2x scale version of the screenshot (which actually depicts an uncustomized default GNOME setup on an high density screen, apart from indicators, which I forgot to disable).

Also because I believe having a single code base covering different form factors is an unique feature worth mentioning in the correspondent page section and inserting a gallery-like widget around there (instead of the single 'phone' screenshot I added) to show how it renders on the three form factors would be the perfect compromise.

Ogoorcs (talk) 22:56, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ogoorcs: Hello, you was right, large fonts and customized WikiPedia interface were ugly and unsuitable, so I did update that file again, at the moment, I think taking its screenshot with WikiPedia is a bad idea and unnecessary, because if someone is seeing that screen-shot in the WP, that person does not need to see the WP artikel in the screenshot again, I think its official website is more beautiful and useful.

@Ahunt: Thank you but NO, your screen-shot is really ugly, simple, with useless white space around it, it also does not show most/all the software features like ("it has scrollbar--menu is opened--download icon--tab scroll button (see the under < button)").

I think current screen-shot is really great and beautiful, don't change it without explanation first.--Editor-1 (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

The updated version of the current one is a little bit better. It can probably suffice until the next version comes out and we get a new screenshot of it. - Ahunt (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Version 3.34 is out already (in many formats). Can't see why we can't have a representative updated screenshot.Ogoorcs (talk) 22:56, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

GNOME Web 3.34 with default GNOME appearance (Archlinux, 28 Sept. 2019)

Present main picture of GNOME Shell Wikipedia page (28 Sept. 2019)

GNOME 3.34 default font and window controls layout

@Editor-1: I see your point, but unfortunately in this case it is not valid; the reasons are:

- as Ahunt said, the screenshot should be taken with default settings (give me good faith here);

- application developers explicitly chose to adhere to GNOME Human Interface Guidelines, which at the present tell us that the default font for GNOME applications is Cantarell at size 10 or 11; I can clearly see that in your new screenshot you are using Sans font in the 14-16 size range;

- many GNOME developers published just some months ago a manifesto explicitly asking software distributors to stop changing their applications appearance, because they are not designed, they say, to be used with settings different from the one they chose (i.e. they are ugly); so basically we would do just the opposite of what the Web developers asked communities.

I think you can agree that developer word is the last word here.

Ogoorcs (talk) 22:56, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Our general consensus on software screenshots has been to use ones that are as non-customized as possible to show what it installs like "out-of-the-box" and to use light and neutral GTK/Qt themes as well. The lede screenshot is supposed to show the reader a recent version of the software in as unmodified state as possible, so it is very close to what they would see if they read the article and then went and sudo apt installed it right away. - Ahunt (talk) 23:02, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

So here it is a screenshot with the same content as it was before the beginning of this discussion and default GNOME 3.34 appearance, by which I mean the one that is shared by GNOME apps binary distributions (gnome-nightly), Archlinux, Debian, Ubuntu (with gnome-vanilla installed), Fedora and Flathub runtimes.

Ogoorcs (talk) 23:13, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

"which at the present tell us that the default font for GNOME applications is Adwaita"

There is no mention of "Adwaita" in the link, it says "In GNOME 3, the default font is Cantarell".

that manifesto is about software distributors/Linux distros, although I can understand it can be extended to the GNOME screenshots, specially on WikiPedia, but my image was in default theme just its dark variant (Adwaita-dark).

I have taken another sreen-shot and changed it to the default light theme because curent dark theme (GTK 3.24.8) has some minor problems, it also has no scrollbar, so the blue bar in the website is shown complete, also other tabs have better titles.

This is the last screen-shot I did take for v3.32, just wait 1 month, Ubuntu and Fedora will release their next version and I will switch to Fedora and will take one screen-shot with default settings.Editor-1 (talk) 09:19, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

That would be great if we can get a fresh screenshot when Ubuntu 19.10 comes out! right now it looks like it will be 3.34.0. - Ahunt (talk) 13:03, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

You can install upstream stable GNOME 3.34 apps on any */Linux with GNOME Nightly flatpaks.

Ogoorcs (talk) 23:13, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

@Editor-1: it clearly was a typo, I know the difference between Adwaita (gtk theme, icon theme) and Cantarell because I started this. Months ago I even sistematically wrote "Adwaita" instead of "Cantarell" in glade files. :-)

Your latest screenshot uses Ubuntu typeface. Check with Tweaks that you are using the latest settings. Check your results against shell page main picture.

Ogoorcs (talk) 23:13, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I think no one really can't reconize what font is used in my and your screenshot unless some developers like you! and both fonts are very similar. Just wait 3 week and I will add an excellent screen-shot with default settings. OK?--Editor-1 (talk) 04:57, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Sir, your argument is invalid: any person interested in application design and design in general should be able to tell you those fonts are really different. If those are not among your main interests, just do not focus on application screenshots, or just stop pretending to know better of the application designers.

I do not see any need to wait three weeks: your screenshot three weeks from now would be the same as mine, if you will use GNOME defaults.

If you do not know how to upgrade to the present stable release, this is no reason to waste others' work because in three weeks you will be able to make it useless.

If you think you will make an even better screenshot, you have the right to do it whenever you want, but you are not entitled to put others' people valid work on hold.

Now I am gonna set the updated screenshot. (Apparently, other people already did it.)

Ogoorcs (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

"Apparently, other people already did it."

It was not other people! it was me! (Special:MobileDiff/918369917).--Editor-1 (talk) 14:22, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Error in Info box

I just noticed an error in the info box under Preview Releases.

It says 'Error: first parameter cannot be parsed as a date or time'.

Can someone please fix this? GabrielBloom28 (talk) 16:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

That error is actually not from this article, but transcluded from Wikidata. Good luck trying to fix that on Wikidata. My experience that is that Wikidata is very broken and overall doesn't work, just produces endless errors like this one. Perhaps the best approach is to delete the Wikidata links and use local information instead. - Ahunt (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Gnomelogo.svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:28, 21 September 2022 (UTC)