Wikipedia talk:Extended image syntax/Archive 1

message: This archive of contains discussions up to March 2004.  It was created on 28 July 2004
I've gone through and added headers to each of the conversations on this page so that it's easier to navigate. Some of them duplicate one another, but I won't presume to rearrange other people's comments just yet. - IMSoP 21:10, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

message: Once this feature is included in a MediaWiki release, this page will need to be moved to meta:MediaWiki User's Guide. In the future, we will need to have a help namespace for MediaWiki-specific pages that would link to the user guide on Meta. --mav 00:20, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Eventual move to meta / help namespace

message: Would it be possible to extend the new syntax to supply a seperate image to be used as the thumbnail? For some images I optimized the thumbnail manually to provide only a part of the full image to enhance the quality of the small image. For two Examples see my user page in de:.
It should be possible to implement this backward compatible as:  -- LosHawlos 20:38, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I do that too. In that case, couldn't you just redirect the image page of the small image to the image page of the big image? --mav 00:03, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Supplying own thumbnail

message: There is now acres of white space next to the picture at the top of this page (at least on my not-excessively-high-res screen). A similar thing is occuring at Hutton Inquiry. Is this due to the new image markup? Could it be changed so that the text wraps around the pictures like it used to... I think it is less ugly that way. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 08:23, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It still wraps around the pictures just like it used to for me.  While you're waiting for the techies to arrive, perhaps you should say what operating system and browser you're using... those are usually the first questions.  (What I did to the Hutton Inquiry must look really bad on your machine, sorry!).  fabiform | talk 09:10, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: IE 5.5 on Windows NT. (It doesn't look great - but I am slowly learning not to fly off the handle about these things - if something needs to be fixed then it will be soon enought) Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:15, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: This was causing the problem:   It was inserted when Hutton's picture was moved to the left.  I have removed it, and now the text should wrap properly. --Minesweeper 09:17, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I left it there when I moved the pic to the right again assuming it served a useful purpose... sorry.  But you said the pic looked all wrong on the village pump as well?  fabiform | talk 09:32, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Post hard refresh (ctrl+f5) it now appears fine on both this and the Hutton page. I don't know if there has been a change on this page or if it was just the refresh that sorted something. Thanks for all your help guys. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 10:04, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Oddly, it seems I have to hard refresh every time I come to this page to get the correct layout. i.e. I load the page, get whitespace, hard refresh, no whitespace. Something local to me? Something squidy? Something with the new image code? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 12:11, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Image position

message: Sennheiser points out a problem with the new image resize feature. Please see Igor Kurchatov to fully understand the problem.
: Is that  tag allowed? If you take it out, the problem goes away. Not sure the new thumbnail feature allows that formatting. Fuzheado 14:47, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: the center is fine (although it shows in the alt text!), the problem is the "".  I just chucked the pic in the Wikipedia:Sandbox with the "" and then replaced them with ', and it worked.  You can't wikify the caption either, and I imagine that you might have a problem if the caption should read thumb, or right.  ;)  (Wonderful beard, by the way!) fabiform | talk 14:52, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Bug in the image resize code

message: At least in my prefered browser Opera, the "thumb" function for images seems not to be producing the desired results. The smaller version of the pic is in the article all right, but the little "enlarge" icon is seldom anywhere near the pic, sometimes paragraphs away, often over irrelevent text. Could we please stop converting images to this new system until it works better? Thanks, -- Infrogmation 05:47, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No such problem in my current version of Opera 7.50 preview. Jor 17:19, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: Take a look at the front page of wikipedia on the Macintosh version of Internet explorer 5.  It looks terrible, but it works fine on every other browser so we haven't done anything about it.  Perhaps you could find another browser(s)? Mabye one that is open source. Or, you could just use Internet explorer 6. Sennheiser cringes at this suggestion, deciding to strike it out and replace it with an advertisement for the Mozilla Firebird .7 browser. Sennheiser! 22:11, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Thumb" image function annoyingly buggy 

message: See e.g. Ko Phi Phi Lee, there the image caption was made in italics using something like . However the ALT text which shows when the mouse hovers over the image then shows Mahya Bay, which is a bit ugly. Thus we either have to avoid anything except plain text in the description, or the HTML tags need to be stripped in the ALT text. andy 10:38, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've noticed this too.  I often see  in the alt text on these new thumbnails.  Using  is a bit silly though as you could use double apostrophes which would look like "quote marks" in the alt text - perfect!  fabiform | talk 21:35, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that the wikitax apostrophes get turned into HTML tags before the alt- and title-text are generated (note that the pop-up text is the title, the alt is an alternative for users who can't see images). So it's the HTML version that shows up.  The software could indeed spot these and trim them out though; it also adds further weight to the idea of allowing the subtitled caption to be distinct from the alt/title text. - IMSoP 23:46, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh!  Now I see, whoops.  fabiform | talk 00:34, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: This is the result of a bug report I sent to wikitech-l reporting other strange html tags showing up around images which contained both quotation marks (") and apostrophes ('). That was fixed, but now the problem of 'em' tags replacing apostrophes has surfaced. - snoyes 19:54, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  HTML tags show in ALT text 

message: A nice addition would be if one could use:
: 
instead of 
:
--User:Docu
:It would be. If I'm right about how this image syntax is implemented, though, the "right" and "left" keywords are currently implemented using a CSS property that is only designed to display things on either side of the page, so adding a "center" keyword would mean designing and implementing a separate mechanism just to handle that keyword. Which means more work for the developers, which means: don't expect to see it any time soon. —Paul A 02:11, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  align center/centre ? 

message: There is a white box around the magnifying glass in internet explorer making it hardly asthetically pleasing. No one should be using internet explorer(except at public libraries), though so I don't know if this is our problem. --Sennheiser! 17:56, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It buggers up in Opera 6.x also. Tannin 18:00, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there not supposed to be a white box around the magnifying glass?  It didn't occur to me that this was a bug.  I use crazy browser, but it uses IE to render the pages I think.  Perhaps we should compare screenshots? fabiform | talk 20:23, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Brion changed the image so it's now an 8-bit png.  In my browser at least (IE), the background is transparent now.  Yay!  fabiform | talk 01:30, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Magnifying glass and IE6

message: I didn't even mean for the image on Unit 731 to be in the space it showed up in, but it fits perfectly!. --Sennheiser! 00:06, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Unexpected performance

message: Anyone know of an elegant way to force a line break between two images using the Extended Image Format. Right now I'm using:
:
It's basically the same hack as in CSS for floated images, but I was wondering if there is a "built-in" way using the new format. -- Decumanus 02:33, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: that hack doesn't work when you want to float text around two vertically stacked images in the extended format. Right now only a table or div works (old method). Any ideas? -- Decumanus 02:46, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO it's just another instance of the new syntax failing to provide the facilities we need to write articles. The new syntax seems to have been used as a vehicle to promote some ideas of the way articles should be formatted, and in particular the way images are presented. If you don't agree with these ideas, stick to the old syntax. That's what I'm doing. I think I've given the new syntax a fair go, and it is simply not suitable for my purposes. Hopefully, some day some developer will give us what we want: A simple way to wrap text around a simple image, with an optional caption (that's 'caption' in the long-standing Wikipedia sense of an italicised subtitle), so as to make the articles look great on any screen width. Andrewa 09:10, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the autothumbnailing, but the lack of a caption capability on the non-thumbnail images is a serious problem for me. Also, the lack of markup options within the caption are a bother too - many of the images I'd like to convert to the new markup format have links in their captions, for example, and I think it's important to preserve those. Is there a good place to go to present votes on this kind of thing? Bryan 01:32, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Line Breaks in Extended Image Format

message: related to right aligned images and bulleted lists.  Needs to be fixed soon! The text in the bulleted list doesnt wrap under the image, but stays in a column. Look at example: User:Perl/example Perl 00:18, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That wraps fine in my browser.  You should say which browser and operating system you're using.  :) fabiform | talk 00:46, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: I have the bug in Firefox .8. (text wraps fine in IE) Perl 01:17, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You should at least consider the possibility that the bug is not in Wikipedia but in your browser (particularly considering the release number). --Paul A 02:13, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It's Bug 143162 I suppose. – Torsten Bronger 07:20, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrible bug... 

message: JeLuF has launched a design competition at meta:Image Box for people interested in changing the way thumbnails are displayed using the extended image syntax.
Note, this is for people who want to change the CSS which creates the (currently grey) boarder around the image, and what icon to use, if any – not for dicussing the ins and outs of how the images are resized and compressed on the fly.  Voting is expected to begin on March 15, so all suggestions should be made by then.  :) fabiform | talk 15:10, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Design competition for Thumbnail Boxes

message: I want a nice simple way, not much harder than typing two apostrophes for emphasis, to markup up images so that they will be displayed in whatever people think is the best style for standard, plain vanilla pictures. This currently seems to be a right-aligned picture with text wrapping around it and a caption underneath. 
*In the common case where the picture itself is about the right size (e.g. 300 pixels wide) and there is no larger image available or needed, there should be no need for a magnifying glass icon. 
*The caption should by default be in smaller type than the main text.
*It should be possible for a caption to be several lines long and contain emphasis, common Wiki markup, and links.
*It should be so simple that the average newbie trying out images for the first time using the hints on the "How to Edit" page will typically do the right thing.
As nearly as I can tell, the current extended image markup does not yet meet these desiderata. 
Just as we have    to take care of "boilerplate" notices--and to allow for mass change of such notices--we should have some kind of "boilerplate" image markup. 
Just my $0.02. Dpbsmith 15:58, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Some kind of boilerplate for the "standard, plain vanilla, recommended" style?

message: * The line:
The empty string, if there an explicitly requested Caption and the image type has a visible caption.
is missing an "is" between there and an.
* Also, in the sentence:
...and examples 2 and 3 provide no navigatable links to the files themselves...
"navigatable" is not a word; the correct word is navigable.  (Wiktionary does include navigatable, defining it in a strictly web-related sense; however, I could find no other [free] online dictionary—and I was thorough, checking the free dictionaries at www.merriam-webster.com, www.oxforddictionaries.com, dictionary.cambridge.org, www.thefreedictionary.com, and dictionary.com (alias dictionary.reference.com)—that included navigatable; they all included navigable.)
I can't make these edits because the page is protected (so I'm noting the errors here, the next best thing).
141.158.233.114 (talk) 00:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone has applied your suggestions, cheers! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 09:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy edits