Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:05:15 UTC
I need to use text "(last)" for another purpose. Because it will influence a lot, I invested into a thorough argumentation and indicate a highest priority to trigger broad discussion at the soonest. At the moment, it indicates the difference view between the revision in that line n (in Recent changes, watchlist and page history views) to the preceding version to that line n (thus diff between "n" and "n-1"). Because any other texts I have tried are misleading (lvrd = last visited revsion diff is too complicated and not intuitive), I suggest the following two changes which makes sense - Brion, please think over this _thoroughly_ before simply saying WONTFIX In recent changes pages (diff) (hist) --> (prev) (hist) in page history pages: (cur) (last) --> (cur) (prev) (prev) is the new suggested name of the link to the difference view between that revision line n and the previous revision n-1 (cur) unchanged (hist) unchanged and, new, (last) is the new link introduced within ENotif [3] to the difference view between that revision line n and the last seen revision m (individual for any watching user; only for watched pages) [1] http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=804 create an LVR REPOSITORY for last-visited revisions until they are visited [2] http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181 [3] http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454 Assign lasting ID to latest revision of articles
(typo corr in title)
Changing UI in this way is confusing for users. Can't you use (prev) for "difference to my previously seen revision)", or use a more verbose link for this?
(In reply to comment #2) > JeLuF wrote: Changing UI in this way is confusing for users. > Can't you use (prev) for "difference to my previously seen revision)", or use a > more verbose link for this? JeLuF, can you please consider to study this argumentation ? I refrain from reopening the bugzilla in order not to start a "bugzilla war" - this isn't my intention. I have tried about 10 variations, such as (lvrd) (last visited revision difference), but it gives a broken screen layout. Now. I am using "(prev) (last) (hist) pagename" Here again my argumentation for changing text of existing "(last)" links to "(prev)" : Status: 1. The existing text on Page Hsitory pages says "Legend: (cur) = difference with current version, (last) = difference with __preceding__ version, M = minor edit" ==> This "(last)" is totally misleading and is suggested to be changed to "(prev)" or "(prec)", which explains better, that the previous version is referred to. "(last)" will then be free to be used for the "link to the difference to the last seen revision" 2. On recent changes pages - non-enhanced-view- , we have at the moment (last) (diff) pagename The linkname "(last)" can be replace with "(prev)" or "(prec)", same argumentation as above. "(prev) Previous" or "(prec) preceding" explains much better, what difference is really meant. I fully understand your objections w.r.t. UI changes, but in this respect it appears that you keep on sticking to wrong labels. Once "(last)" is replaced here, I need it for denoting the the new (last) = show difference between this revision and the last revision I saw This UI change ***is*** implemented in my ENotif3.05 for Mediawiki REL1_4 as ppublished in http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454 and http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enotif (see this for download URL)
added to title "using tooltips" on (diff) (last) (prev) (hist) labels. Already implemented in http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454 ENotif v3.x As not everyone like tooltips, I need another user option to disable them.
Don't change the meaning of a label. It's confusing to users, no matter how good your arguments are. Users are used to these labels. "Der Mensch ist ein Gewohnheitstier". German proverb.
(In reply to comment #5) > Don't change the meaning of a label. It's confusing to users .. Users are used to these labels. I see, but another proverbs says "Das Bessere ist der Feind des Guten" and as Prof. Milberg (BMW, TU Berlin u.a.) says: "Die Zukunft kommt von alleine. Der Fortschritt _nicht_."
How about a label like "New" or "Missed" or "Unseen"? I'm not sure how important it is to maintain a 4-letter label. How well is this sort of parallelism maintained in other languages?
Whether or not "(last)" is a good label for what it currently does, 'reusing it' for a completely different meaning is just going to lead to mass confusion. If it needs changing, change it, but don't immediately use the old label with a new meaning. I suggest "(seen)" - neatly four letters like the others, and sums up far better than "last" what you are comparing with: the version you've seen.
My dear friends, thank you for your comments. The "(seen)" idea is good, but I need something for the inverse. "(nys)" not yet seen is cryptic "(new)" is already marked with the beamy updated marker; "new" can also mean a "new page" and isn't unambiguous. After studying your proposals, the problem is, that you do not (yet) really understand. To make it easier, it prepared (very quickly) a first commented screenshot. Please be kind to me and do not flood me now with "this is weird" comments - what I suggest here is something what I already use and what runs smoothly, but which is new for the mass (here). Please, may I kindly invite you to have a look to the commented screenshot in http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Email_notification_%28documentation%29#Basics where I prepared a comprehensive example ?
(In reply to comment #9) > The "(seen)" idea is good, but I need something for the inverse. Forgive me if I'm being thick, but how is it "the inverse?" From what I understand, this is a link which, when clicked, shows a diff between a specific version (which may or may not be the current version) and the most recent version that the user has seen. So "last", in your current code, is presumably short for "last seen"; I would suggest that this is confusing, because "last" also means "previous" [a bug in the English language, if you like], notwithstanding the fact that people are used to what it means in this same context at the moment. So, I suggest "seen", also short for "last seen", but less ambiguous. I can only presume you are thinking that this diff shows "the changes you haven't seen", but I am mystified as to how "last" could be short for that. Note that there are already links labelled "cur", which do not link to the current revision, but to a *diff against* the current revision; similarly, "seen" would link to a *diff against* the seen revision. It makes perfect sense to me, but if you think this is too confusing, how about being more explicit and saying "to cur" and "to seen"? Personally, I think as soon as somebody clicks one, they'll notice it's a diff and not a page, and get the idea, but I tend to see things like that with a very "systems" eye. Generally, it may be that the labels as they stand aren't perfect; but changing them *will* confuse users, and the replacements need to be thought through carefully; and "reusing" one of the old labels, when it isn't the perfect choice for the new link either, seems to be guaranteed to make things worse, not better. [Oh, and I really don't see the need to let people turn off tooltips; if they don't want to see them, they can rest their mouse somewhere else on the page :)] Hm, I must be tired, this reads as a bit cranky. I am trying to be helpful, not just argumentative, honest! :-/
I agree to Rowan's recent proposal to use "(last seen)" for it. Thus the proposed links on Recent Changes pages are (diff) (last seen) (hist) and all existing links keep their names and function. First screenshot from my personal CVS HEAD checkout: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Mw15_rc_wikinaut.png - this screenshot is also available on http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enotif
*implemented* in ENotif/EConfirm v3.16, see http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454 .
