Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-03-26/Technology report

Discuss this story

Forget Hovercards, I want hoverboards! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:50, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For clarification, once the Typography Refresh comes out of Beta I'll lose this pretty new Table of Contents? You can pry it out of my cold, dead hands! I don't ever want to see the old ToC again, please! --Nicereddy (talk) 01:59, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So what's the answer to the question posed in the title? Tony (talk) 02:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Georgia may look familiar; the Signpost has used it for its headers for some time now. And that is why..." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to the sentence beneath the numbered list, "Other features that were in the beta but were not strictly typography-related, such as the restyled table of contents, thumbnail and blockquote styling, have been removed."

I was wondering if, based on that, the table of contents will revert back to the dark gray background it has when Typography refresh isn't enabled. --Nicereddy (talk) 02:18, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Tony was replying to your comment. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the TOC styling is not part if this update. Basically, anything not related to fonts has been abandoned. But there is a gadget that does apply a different styling to the TOC, category boxes and image thumbs in the Testing and Development (bottom) section of the gadget preferences. Give that one a try. (Note, may clash with the beta.) — Edokter (talk) — 12:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Hover' feature is very clever and useful IMHO, but what is to be done when is directs to the wrong information when there is an alternative meaning? How does the reader correct it?Apwoolrich (talk) 20:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]