Wikipedia talk:Flow/Interactive prototype

Please leave your feedback about the interactive prototype for Flow here.

Looks great

Very nice! πr² (t • c) 03:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

One thing I'm wondering is whether Flow will support wikitext. If not by default, there should be at least some way of using wikitext (including templates). Refs won't work however, unless an implcicit <references> is added. πr² (t • c) 22:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Tighten the vertical

Looks like a very good start. In the final version, endeavor to make better use of vertical space on the screen. The large headers for each message are an unnecessary waste of space. Gigs (talk) 17:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Great idea

It's a very good start, but I do agree with Gigs above. It's too spread out. One thought would be to start with the whole thing collapsed and progressively unfold threads as you go (or have a collapse/expand all). It's harder to manage on a tablet than with a mouse so you do need the conventional triangles as you have them. Most recent first helps and that could maybe be extended to the dialogues by still using the indentation. There should be a wikitext option as with VisualEditor. Chris55 (talk) 22:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

It will save users from getting blocked

It would have saved this user and many other users from getting unnecessary blocks, besides saving them from wading through wikicode. Non-blocked users=happy users. It would also have saved ANI from this. Hurra!!! to flow.OrangesRyellow (talk) 13:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Dead on arrival

The screen is dark grey, some mangled text and logos pile up in upper left corner. Static picture, mouse clicks don't do anything. Well, at least the system didn't crash. Yes, sir, it's IE8 under XP, the almighty corporate standard. Retired electrician (talk) 06:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

The flow, or any other system would look better with less acidic comments, even with the screen being dark grey and mangled text etc. It is OK to offer constructive criticism, but looking at your manner, Yes Sir, I do wonder if you ever say things in a less disagreeable manner.OrangesRyellow (talk) 13:50, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

The prototype was written and tested on Chrome and Firefox. I can't vouch for IE; I don't have versions of it. Try using a different browser.--Jorm (WMF) (talk) 17:20, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Screen size

Half of my screen is empty when using your prototype... 90.184.127.227 (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

As is mine. I don't think it matters, though, as it's not an actual webpage (just a running program). AFisch99 (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Looks terrible

I tried this without logging in (take a look at [1]: "There is currently no text in this page. You can search for this page title in other pages, or search the related logs, but you do not have permission to create this page." and yuo'll understand why) I arrive at [2], which starts with

Castles: would you like to live in one?

Discuss... Edit summary

Where only "edit summary" is a link. I don't want an "edit summary", I may want to discuss this (but I can't click the "discuss" text) or I may want to start a new topic (no idea how to do this, only after a while did I think that perhaps the pake grey box beneath "edit summary" was what I wanted) or find another discussion (no table of contents , and the search doesn't work!).

I somehow found [3], which tells me absolutely nothing. Useless. There is no indication whatsoever how I can leave that history page and go back to the main flow sandbox either. I finally tried it through "Special pages" at the left, found something (<specialpages-group-unknown> <flow>), and then got this internal error page:

TODO: Redirect to users board?

Backtrace:

1. 0 /srv/mediawiki/includes/SpecialPage.php(631): SpecialFlow->execute(NULL)
2. 1 /srv/mediawiki/includes/SpecialPageFactory.php(489): SpecialPage->run(NULL)
3. 2 /srv/mediawiki/includes/Wiki.php(298): SpecialPageFactory::executePath(Object(Title), Object(RequestContext))
4. 3 /srv/mediawiki/includes/Wiki.php(600): MediaWiki->performRequest()
5. 4 /srv/mediawiki/includes/Wiki.php(467): MediaWiki->main()
6. 5 /srv/mediawiki/index.php(49): MediaWiki->run()
7. 6 {main}

Other issues from a short test; I can change the topic title, but that doesn't seem to be registered in the topic history. A great chance to create anonymous personal attacks and BLP violations.

There is a pale triangle made from 6 dots; the meaning is unclear, using it seems to indicate that it is used to change the size of messages / boxes, but it works rather haphazardly (pulling to the right makes the box grow to the bottom instead, and I can't get back to the original size)

The arrow to the left of a message apparently can be used to collapse it. Not clear at all. An option is needed to collapse all messages at once (or even better, this should be the default state).

All in all, I'm rather underwhelmed by this. Considering this test, I sincerely hope that what you describe at Wikipedia:Flow#Roadmap is no longer correct: Short-term (up to December 2013)

   Yes Done Initial brainstorming and user research
   Yes Done Defining the scope of the first release (Minimum Viable Product)
   Doing... Build interactive prototype of the MVP on WMF Labs
   Not done Community testing and feedback
   Not done Limited, opt-in release on select WikiProject discussion spaces

Please, don't make the same mistakes as with VE again, don't release this (even as opt-in) anywhere but your own place (testwiki and/or MediaWiki) and to a much more thorough dev/WMF testing before you start thinking about "community testing", never mind releasing it. This product is so far from finished that it is laughable. Please don't send any en-wiki users to tools that are announced as nearly ready (released in December 213 at the latest!) but seem to be just starting development some weeks ago, on a remote, badly configured site where even the WMF have hardly made any edits.[4]. Fram (talk) 13:14, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for updating and adding to the details at the project page, I've updated the mw:Flow Portal/Interactive Prototype version to match. [Edit: Maryana updated/shortened the version here, so I've duplicated that to match]

Everything is very much in flux at the moment, with code changes and design changes being added daily. I'll emphasize that on the project page.

I've read (and re-read) your comments, and will add them to the lists of things that the designers need to address, though many are known bugs (eg the 6 dot triangle not functioning properly, and edits in Flow not correctly being added to RecentChanges).

Regarding the rollout speed, as Maryana and Okeyes have written on the main talkpage, it's not being placed anywhere until it's in a state that the Wikiprojects themselves are ready and willing to test it, and there will large changes and much testing before then. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I just don't think it is very smart to direct people to such an early version, they won't be encouraged by it I fear. Fram (talk) 07:12, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Mouse-over

Mouse-over makes the 'thank' and 'reply' buttons appear. It's nice, but I'm a bit old user and I prefer static interface. Could there please consider adding an option to always show these? Thanks. Gryllida (talk) 09:42, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

There was a thread which touches on this at Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Design FAQ#Mouseover_behavior, but it's mostly about a different set of links, until Diego's final (current) comment about how it's an accessibility problem for editors with fine-mouse-control difficulties. I'd recommend mirroring your feedback above, at that thread, and please specify exactly which aspects of the non-static interface you find to be a problem. :) –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:58, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank option

One of the big buttons is «Thank». I don't personally like this feature: I don't feel it appropriate to give numeric scale to one's post. :-)
However I don't think you would remove it entirely. Could this please be opt-out on per-user level (so nobody can thank my posts, if I opt out)?
Thanks. --Gryllida (talk) 09:45, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

There's no scoring involved - the number of thanks is purposefully not attributed to any save, and the specific edit is not directly shown in logs (ie. Special:Log/thanks).

See WP:Notifications/Thanks for more details on this extension. It's not directly part of Flow, we're just hooking into it.

It is possible to disable the Notifications from being sent to you (see Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo), but it's not currently possible to remove the link. - It's a purposefully lightweight extension, so it doesn't check whether a user has "Thanks" enabled or not (that would add dozens of "checks" to every history page, eg [5]). People will see the "thank" link next to your edits, even if you opt-out, afaik.

Regarding how the "Thank" button is included in the Flow UI, that's definitely a good topic for discussion, and (once you've read through that documentation page explaining the feature, to clear up any basic FAQs) I'd recommend starting a thread on that at Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Design_FAQ. :) –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Screen space

A large padding/margin, the posts only occupy about 70% of page width... it doesn't look very nice on smaller desktops does it? :-)
Maybe you could design a more compact version and see how it works out?
(If you point me to the means of playing with the style I could perhaps try to do so.)
Thanks. Gryllida (talk) 09:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

This is partially answered at Wikipedia:Flow/Design_FAQ#Why is there so much whitespace/padding?, with some more discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Design_FAQ#Whitespace & padding. –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Text colour

It appears to be a rather light tone of grey, not very easy on the eyes. Gryllida (talk) 09:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

This is partially answered at Wikipedia:Flow/Design_FAQ#Why is the text grey instead of black?, with discussion at Wikipedia talk:Flow/Design FAQ#Text color. –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Being different

I would perhaps encourage to keep the appearance as close to existing appearance (such as that at this page) as possible: for the sake of no user surprises concept. Gryllida (talk) 09:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Status

I made a comment here at the start of October (the "looks terrible" section above), and while a number of things I complained about are no longer there, there are plenty of new issues and very few actual improvements visible (e.g. what is the "comment" line supposed to do? It only scrolls to the bottom of the topic, to immediately scroll up to the topic title again; clicking inside a topic header apparently collapses and uncollapses the topic, which isn't very intuitive). Contributions to flow pages don't appear in user's contributions, and the history of flow pages is totally useless (no dates/time, no diff, ...) As it stands, it is still basically useless, so I wonder what the current "roadmap" looks like and what the WMF expectations are wrt first release and so on. Fram (talk) 10:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm quite worried by comments like here from 22 November " Werdna (Talk | contribs)

Flow is reaaaally pretty now. I feel like we're getting really close!

5 days ago Fri, 22 Nov 2013 03:54:23 GMT Reply Permalink Maryana (Talk | contribs)

Werdna: Totally. It's looking really great – even if there are bugs here and there, I'll be proud to show this off to the community. "

Apart from the fact that it may "look" great, it isn't great to actually use at all (which is slightly more important than the looks of it), it also doesn't have "bugs here and there", it is filled with bugs from start to end. This is far from ready for even a limited, one-project rollout. Fram (talk) 11:07, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

@Fram: In order:

• The "comment on "[topic title]"" text-field (e.g. under here) is to add a post to the topic at root-level. It's akin to starting a new line without any colons, on current talkpages. Clicking in the text-field should expand the text-field from 1-line-high to 6-lines-high, and should not scroll anywhere. (I just tested/confirmed that in Firefox and Chrome) - does that work differently for you? (If so, what browser/OS are you using, please?) And, Would you suggest a wording change for the placeholder text?
• Re: Clicking on the topic-title to trigger a Topic-collapse or Topic-expand: I agree it's not immediately obvious, but I will suggest that it's a fairly standard user-interface method, eg gmail, and once discovered by each user it might be the most practical method. The alternatives would include: creating a word/icon at the right, to trigger the un/collapse. If you have suggestions for other methods, or specific thoughts on how to improve the current method, that'd be great.
• Flow in Special:Contributions, and diffs in the History pages - both should be coming by the end of this fortnight. (And yup, they're blockers for release).
• I mentioned a few details on the roadmap/release plan at this reply on ee-flow, and will update the list at Wikipedia:Flow#Roadmap shortly.

HTH. –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

General: FF25, Windows 7.

• In [6], when I click "comment" on one of the longer threads, e.g. "Post eating om nom nom", then I end up at the top of the thread, not at the comment box. A timer (circle of lines going round and round) appears, and nothing happens. The same happens on every page.
• Collapsing: when I'm in the topic title box, then clicking anywhere collapses it, e.g. also if I click on one of the names of the contributors to that thread (by the way, is there a max number that can be displayed?). Not really what I expect, but others may of course disagree.
• History seems to be getting worse? Looking at this, all I get is a large bold "Last 4 hours" text in the upper left corner, and nothing else (literally, no buttons, text, images, whatever). This happens immediately after I deleted a topic, but also after I added one, so it doesn't seem to be deletion-related. Fram (talk) 12:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Anonymous users with only IP addresses will get confusing

If we want anonymous users to be able to contribute to conversations without sacrificing readability I'd suggest a simple "avatar" solution. The developers of flow could, theoretically, choose 20-25 different colors and these colors would be randomly assigned to each user in the conversation (anonymous or otherwise). If an anonymous user came back and commented again, they'd have the same color as their previous comment (of course, as long as they're still accessing Wikipedia through the same IP address). I imagine this could be implemented as a simple square next to the user's name. If we're planning on having larger discussions we may want to have the colors also associated with numbers or letters, that way instead of various similar shades of red representing different users it'd be a single shade of red with each unique user having a letter/number over that red. This would, of course, only happen if there were enough unique users in the same thread. This color system would also, as I imagine it, be used on logged in users for consistency and simplicity.

The only issue with this is for places like Qatar (I believe?) in which all citizens share the same IP address. I believe this would be a rare situation, and the current implementation would have the same exact problem anyway.

Please do give feedback on this, I've found that I have a lot of issue with back-and-forth conversation when users are anonymous as IP addresses are hard to distinguish from one another in many cases.

Nicereddy (talk) 02:54, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

A few interesting ideas in there.

Re: color: There would be cultural issues with assigning colors (eg Color in Chinese culture), as well as individual issues with someone disliking the color that gets assigned to them (eg someone getting assigned pink in a discussion about gender or sexuality; or getting assigned black/brown/etc in a discussion about race).

Re: Simple square: you might be familiar with Gravatar, which implements something similar to this. Avatars in general, have been discussed before, and there are some objections (from the editor community) to visual-additions like this, because of their eyecatching nature. Personalizable avatars are even more complicated (with issues of non-free-content, and objectionable-content, and more). It's definitely not a simple issue.

Re: Shared IPs: there are actually a lot of instances of this. Thousands of schools/universities/libraries/businesses/governmentdepts/etc use shared IPs, hence the abundance of Category:Shared IP header templates.

HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:46, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Vertical divider for entire conversation thread Suggestion

Currently, there are vertical dividers to distinguish between separate branches of a conversation. This works well, however my issue is that the conversation as a whole has no way of distinguishing other than the large gray headers. This is minor, but for me personally readability would be increased by adding a vertical line in the margin for the thread as a whole in order to more easily distinguish separate threads from each other. Nicereddy (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Login page has some verious strange messages

Looking now at the Flow prototype login page on Labs [7], it has a very strange message at the bottom, starting with:

"array(6) { [0]=> array(2) { ["function"]=>" (it's a lot longer but contains private info, so I'll not repeat it here). It then repeats the login screen, and continues with a much longer message blow this. Fram (talk) 10:07, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Recent changes

Recent changes now gives

"Catchable fatal error: Argument 1 passed to Flow\Data\BasicObjectMapper::fromStorageRow() must be an array, null given, called in /srv/mediawiki/extensions/Flow/includes/Data/ObjectManager.php on line 400 and defined in /srv/mediawiki/extensions/Flow/includes/Data/ObjectManager.php on line 599 array(1) { [0]=> array(2) { ["function"]=> string(9) "{closure}" ["args"]=> array(0) { } } } "

Fram (talk) 10:15, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

This and the thread above, are now fixed. They needed to flush a cache, and are developing a script to automate it (or somethingsomethingtechnical along those lines). Thanks for the notes. –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Fram (talk) 07:47, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

extension flow feedback

hi please give it a new look. because ive just tried it out. please update the commet box so that they are on there own and please when starting a new topic it has a line under the header and then the question or topic under the header please simler to liquidthread which this extension is meant to be newer and better then liquidthread but it is not it is still old and still doesent include the features which are found in liquidthread. and please include a new look to view history so that you can see the difference between like you can do without the extension please 86.135.255.245 (talk) 22:18, 21 December 2013 (UTC)