Yuvi and I chatted today about references for the app version 1. We decided
to go with the simple version for now, though we will add indication of the
type of template used (book, web, news, etc.)
In the future we would really like to reformat references so that a user
can quickly see the title, source, and date consistently, and show labels
for additional fields (page number, location, edition number...) because
they can be confusing when shown without labels. To do this Yuvi says we
need to annotate the html in templates to show classes for each of those
fields.
Here's an updated
pdf<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Reference-tooltips-Apr14.pdf…
the simple version and future designs.
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Kaity Hammerstein <
khammerstein(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Here's a link to a pdf showing designs for
reference
tooltips<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Reference-tooltips-Apr.…df>.
The 1st 3 pages show desktop designs with different options.
*Page 1* If we can parse a reference and determine if it includes a
common template, we can indicate with an icon which type it is (book, web,
news...)
If we can determine the title parameter, we can highlight or bold that in
the reference so its more readable.
We could also pull the lead image if there's a wikipedia article linked in
the ref.
*Page 2 *If we don't want to bother with all that, the formatting isn't
changed.
*Page 3* If we parse the template type and each of the parameters. We
can totally reformat the reference to show title, source, and date, then
show other parameters with labels if a user taps to expand. This is the
cleanest and most readable, but may take more work.
*Page 4 *Showing simple version in app context.
What do you think, should we show image thumbnails? Can we parse the
templates and all parameters?
If you're interested there's more background on the design on
mediawiki<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reference_readability>
.
Thanks!
Kaity