Topic on Talk:Flow/Interactive prototype

If Flow should ever get accepted at all I'd propose fundamental style changes:

• First of all the interface wastes by far too much space. Two lines of content are using up approx. five times the space because of

1. excessive padding
2. the disproportionate header (with user name, edit count etc.) and
3. the incredibly large reply button

Header and reply button should add two additional lines at most. Padding should be reduced to a minimum.

• Secondly the interface does not fit into Wikipedia. We have an Wikipedia interface (or more correctly various skins) with some recognition value. Flow should look exactly like every other page on Wikipedia. That includes especially headings but also all other content:

1. Headings should have the same level as on other pages (e.g. "h1" for the page title, "h2" for top level sections (which could actually be threads) and look exactly the same.
2. Large green "Reply" buttons or are a no-go. Simple textual links would suffice by far.
3. Actually styled buttons should be kicked out completely. We never used them in Wikipedia and it should stay this way. Use native inputs.

Don't start trying to overstyle everything. Stick to the classic skins (and make Flow skinnable as MediaWiki itself) so it blends into the rest of the page.

I share the view above, I love the idea but the interface itself is too bulky..

I completely agree.

I agree there is too much space wasted. It feels like there would be far too much scrolling with the padding, very large police, big buttons and so on.

I would nevertheless suggest that buttons might not be a bad idea necessarily. We tend to have lots of link and from time to time, it is pleasant to see immediately the one we should click upon. With people with visual problems, it might make sense to have buttons which would satisfy accessibility requirement possibly better than a simple blue word could do (I have never actually tested the contrast between the blue of links and black of text, but I would not be surprised if it failed accessibility recommendations).

Last, regarding space, it should not be fixed width but a width that automatically adapt itself to the support. If a phone, very small column. If a laptop, it would be more confortable; If a wide screen, it really ought to take the entire width rather than about 1/3 as the prototype is doing.

I beg to differ slightly. I agree that consistency is good but actually most modern websites do have a lot more "white space" than Wikipedia does; it makes Wikipedia look cluttered and a bit old fashioned. I would argue things the other way - we want Wikipedia to look more like Flow than the other way around. But I guess that's down to personal preference.

That being the case, the question really becomes - is Flow skinnable? Can we personalise the css?

yutube