MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive 21: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) from MediaWiki talk:Common.js) (bot |
m Obsolete HTML tags "tt" swapped out for "code". Project Lint |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 92:
:*Globally embedded page modules. These modules (such as "<code>user.options</code>") are embedded within the page for security and/or performance reasons. Since they execute synchronously and are embedded before any load queue, these not only load by default but also "finish" loading before any module, gadget or otherwise starts loading. Which means technically you can get away with not specifying <code>user.options</code> as a dependency because it's impossible for them not to be there. However, once again, do not rely on the arbitrary implementation detail that this particular module is being embedded right now.
:In short: Just declare all your direct module dependencies (either inline with <code>loader.using</code> or with <code>gadget[dependencies=]</code>) and let ResourceLoader do its job. [[User:Krinkle|Krinkle]] ([[User talk:Krinkle|talk]]) 17:53, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
:: <small>I copied this reply to {{
::{{U|Krinkle}} In short... confusion galore. The naming conventions doesn't help. I thought user.options was part of mw.user (confusion nr.1) and mw.user was stated to be part of mw.map, but not anymore (since today, confucion nr.2). Lastly, there are the base module ''and'' page modules, ''both'' starting with <code>mediawiki.</code> (or <code>.mw</code>?), which creates more confusion. For instance, I do not need to declare <code>mw.config</code>, but I ''do'' need to declare <code>mw.util</code>! ''That'' is why we want a simple list of which of these <code>mediawiki.</code> modules are part of the base module and should not be declared. Then I can happily declare everything else. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#008"><i>E</i>dokter</span>]] ([[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#080">talk</span>]]) — </span> 21:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Line 107:
::Yep! They are loading those URLs just because the English version is not (yet) made up of small RL modules. I could update them to use English Wikipedia's [//en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php load.php] to get the minified version once the code is migrated to gadgets. [[User:Helder.wiki|Helder.wiki]] 20:25, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
:::I don't think that's proper use of load.php. JS modules are loaded by way of a call to mw.loader.load(). <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#008"><i>E</i>dokter</span>]] ([[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#080">talk</span>]]) — </span> 20:51, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
::::What I meant was that other wikis could use something like<br /><syntaxhighlight lang="javascript"
::::Anyway, that is only for other wikis. The loader on English Wikipedia will use just <syntaxhighlight lang="javascript"
:::::Yes, but what I meant is; does load.php even support this manner of loading js modules? I've never seen it like this. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#008"><i>E</i>dokter</span>]] ([[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#080">talk</span>]]) — </span> 21:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
::::::Never mind, should work in theory. Only plus is minification though. Doesn't save http requests. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#008"><i>E</i>dokter</span>]] ([[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#080">talk</span>]]) — </span> 21:14, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Line 136:
* [[MediaWiki:Gadget-refToolbar.js]]: update the loader with [[Special:Diff/534203339/603903140|these changes]].
* [[MediaWiki:Common.js/edit.js]]: [[Special:Diff/603512406/603903897|remove the code]] which is now in the loader.
* Re-create [[MediaWiki:RefToolbarBase.js]] with<blockquote><syntaxhighlight lang="javascript"
[[User:Helder.wiki|Helder.wiki]] 18:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
:All that's needed is a nice description. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#008"><i>E</i>dokter</span>]] ([[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#080">talk</span>]]) — </span> 18:51, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Line 214:
InterwikiLinks[i].className += ' FL';
InterwikiLinks[i].title = 'This is a featured list in this language.';
</pre> should be added there. I don't know whether it's perfectly okay, but something like this. Cause you can't compare a FL with a FA. Also FLs are not FAs. So something kinda this should be added. Thanks. --'''[[User:Pratyya Ghosh|<span style="color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">Pr<
<!-- End request -->
:This will require a change to {{tl|Link FL}} as well, since now [[Special:Diff/263059992|it uses -fa instead of -fl]]. See also the section [[#Global gadget for LinkFA]]. [[User:Helder.wiki|Helder]] 16:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
::[[User:Helder.wiki|Helder]] it's not a very big problem changing {{tl|Link FL}}. But can't this be changed? I mean can't fl be added to the mediawiki page?--'''[[User:Pratyya Ghosh|<span style="color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">Pr<
:::[[User:Helder.wiki|Helder]] Do you think that [[Template:Link FL]] really works after adding "-fl" there? I believe to do that you need to change the MediaWiki:Commons.js first, then it can be changed. --'''[[User:Pratyya Ghosh|<span style="color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">Pr<
::::If English Wikipedia community wants to style interwikis to featured lists differently (that should probably be discussed elsewhere, to get consensus), this is what is needed in the technical side:
::::* <del>Use the current version of the gadget</del><ins>Done</ins>
Line 300:
if (m) {
// if that would be clearer. <
== Replacing Wikiminiatlas.js with OSM.js ==
Line 323:
::'''Support'''. We need better ways to provide geographic information (i.e. maps) in infoboxes than we have currently, and this proposal seems to be a step in the right direction. I see this as a basic need, not optional, thus not simply a gadget. --<small>[[User:Elekhh|ELEKHH]]<sup>[[User talk:Elekhh|T]]</sup></small> 01:25, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
: Support '''as a default-enabled gadget'''. We had the exact same functionality added on the Polish Wikipedia as a default gadget some years ago ([[:pl:MediaWiki:Gadget-map-toggler.js]]; limited by design to two maps only; see e.g. [[:pl:Kraków]]) and no one had ever complained after accidentally disabling it. We even have the styling of the main page implemented as a default-on gadget ([[:pl:MediaWiki:Gadget-main-page.css]]) and no one has problems with it either (I'd make it always-enabled if it was possible, though). I have no reasons to suspect the community here is stupider than the one there and I believe they can deal with it. [[User:Matma Rex|Matma Rex]] <small>[[User talk:Matma Rex|talk]]</small> 08:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
:'''Support''' as default-enabled gadget, with an appropriate description so users know what it does <
:I think using OSM.js (see below) is a better solution than cluttering up already cluttered infoboxes. [[User:MoreTomorrow|MoreTomorrow]] ([[User talk:MoreTomorrow|talk]]) 06:35, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
::{{ping|MoreTomorrow}} This does something totally different than OSM.js. [[User:Jackmcbarn|Jackmcbarn]] ([[User talk:Jackmcbarn|talk]]) 19:29, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Line 416:
:::Basically... yes, we are OK with mirroring. But we cannot possibly and reliably ban bad mirrors this way. In fact, the Wikivoyage code has already been defeated and the mirror now redirects to ''another'' mirror, ''not'' the real Wikivoyage page as directed by this script. This is basically a whack-a-mole solution that needs constant monitoring. So no... I see no benifit for adding this code. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 13:20, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
::::Although I personally don't like that people earn money leveraging for free on the WMF server, but I'm fine if the en:w community are OK with that. By the way, that site has not by-passed this patch, they have stop to access on Wikivoyage, redirecting each link to the English Wikipedia, that's why I've written here. However thank [[User:Edokter|you]] for the answer; I don't like to have pending conversation ;-) --[[User:Andyrom75|<span style="color:#BB0000; font-family:Papyrus; font-size:12px">'''Andyrom75'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Andyrom75|talk]]) 16:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
== withModule ==
Any objections to me adding ?withModule support as in [[mw:Snippets/Load JS and CSS by URL]]? [[User:Legoktm|Legoktm]] ([[User talk:Legoktm|talk]]) 17:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
:Modules can only be invoked by templates. How would this even work? <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 19:18, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
::I'm thinking of the wrong modules... But I think the little use it will have does not quite warrant inclusion. Do you have a use case? And why is it limited to gadgets? <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 19:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Mainly so I can give people a link to demonstrate how a gadget works without requiring them to go into their preferences to enable it, save their preferences, etc. I suspect it'll have similar usage levels to the current withCSS/withJS parameters, which I suspect isn't very much. I'm not sure why it's limited to just gadgets TBH. [[User:Legoktm|Legoktm]] ([[User talk:Legoktm|talk]]) 21:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
== Protected edit request on 9 December 2015 ==
{{edit fully-protected|MediaWiki:Common.js|answered=yes}}
Remove: function addAnonToolbarLinks() and all of it's associated code & comments, as this has now been added to MediaWiki core. <span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS; font-variant:caps;">[[User:Kharkiv07|<span style="color:black">Kharkiv07</span>]] ([[User talk:Kharkiv07|<span style="color: black">T</span>]])</span> 19:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
:It is set to deploy tomorrow (december 10). I already made the code conditional. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 22:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
== Collapsing MOS-compliant tables ==
The guideline for creating tables in articles/lists on Wikipedia is [[MOS:DTT]]. That recommends using captions ({{code|{{!}}+}}) to annotate tables and provide them with headers, etc. There is a specific exception for collapsible tables, because the code used for collapsing does not support captions. I've been looking at the relevant bit of code in [[Mediawiki:Common.js]] and it seems to me that it would be trivial to add it so that this works correctly. It's not a nice little bit of Javascript (it abuses the {{code|id}} property) but it's not complex and this is a fairly simple addition.
It would need to go around line 233.
<syntaxhighlight lang="js">
/* only add button and increment count if the table has content */
var HeaderRow = table.getElementsByTagName( 'tr' )[0];
if ( !HeaderRow ) {
return;
}
var Header = table.getElementsByTagName( 'caption' )[0];
if ( !Header ) {
Header = table.getElementsByTagName( 'th' )[0];
if ( !Header ) {
return;
}
}
</syntaxhighlight>
This adds the content to the caption if it exists and to the first {{code|th}} cell if it doesn't, to support the current functionality. I've tried this out and as far as I can tell this works on {{code|caption}} cells as well as it does on {{code|th}} cells. It would be really good if the MOS-recommended tables worked with captions as well.
If we do this, we would also need to add code to determine whether the first row of the table needs collapsing as well. Perhaps something like:
<syntaxhighlight lang="js">
if ( Button.parentNode.parentNode.nodeName.toLowerCase() === 'caption' ) {
var i = 0;
} else {
var i = 1;
}
</syntaxhighlight>
and then change the loop to
<syntaxhighlight lang="js">
for ( ; i < Rows.length; i++ ) {
</syntaxhighlight>
I'm not familiar with Wikipedia's JS rules/standards or the processes of this page, so I hope I've got it right! Do let me know if I ought to cross-post to [[WP:VPT]] or if this is a perennial proposal that I've missed. [[User:Relentlessly|Relentlessly]] ([[User talk:Relentlessly|talk]]) 10:48, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
:{{ping|Relentlessly}} What is the <code>id</code> abuse? I don't see it. Maybe I need coffee. If this can work without literally abusing <code>id</code> (i.e. having more than one <code>id</code> with the same value on the same page, or using invalid values of the attribute), then this would be really fantastic to implement. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 12:48, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
::{{replyto|SMcCandlish}} {{diff|MediaWiki talk:Common.js|prev|708592642|This won't work}}. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 21:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
:::I thought the ping would work as long as there was a new sig/timestamp. Why can't they fix this thing? <sigh> <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 00:38, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
::::No, you cannot cause a notification by modifying an existing post. It's covered at [[WP:Echo#Triggering events]] and see [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Redrose64&limit=3&offset=20160307134200 these three edits], individually. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 13:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
::Re-ping: {{U|Relentlessly}} <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 00:38, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
:Thanks for the ping, {{U|SMcCandlish}}. The abuse is this:
::<syntaxhighlight lang=js>table.setAttribute( 'id', 'collapsibleTable' + tableIndex );</syntaxhighlight>
:The problem here is (a) that it uses the <code>id</code> attribute to store data, which is semantically wrong (and why isn't it using the <code>id</code> property instead?!) and (b) that it destroys any existing <code>id</code> attribute on the element. Now, this won't be an issue for most tables, but occasionally it might be useful to give a table an <code>id</code>, e.g. if direct linking is useful. [[User:Relentlessly|Relentlessly]] ([[User talk:Relentlessly|talk]]) 14:15, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
::Such as, for example, the table linked by [[The Daleks' Master Plan#Doctor Who episode head]]. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 00:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
== Infobox collapsing and moving options ==
I've started a documentation snippet at [[Help:Infobox/user style]], transcluded into various relevant pages, on how to hide infoboxes with user CSS. It would be useful for many users who don't like infoboxes (and for WP as a whole, to get those people to give it a rest) to have two alternatives to hiding them: a) be able to have infoboxes be collapsible (including collapsed by default for those users if they want it that way), or b) be able to move them to the bottom. I'm not sure what the most effective way to go about this is with [[Special:MyPage/common.js]]. One cannot simply try to shunt the infobox to the bottom with pure CSS. This is notoriously impossible without the moved element overlapping other content [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/311990/how-do-i-get-a-div-to-float-to-the-bottom-of-its-container]. It requires one of several methods of injecting additional HTML and CSS into the document strategically [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/814564/inserting-html-elements-with-javascript], but I'm not sure which of these has the lowest impact, or will even work (given the kinds of "don't do certain things" filtering that MW does).
The most common usage is almost certainly going to be to make them collapsible, and for users who don't like them and to have them collapsed by default. This way, their content would still be available in the frequent cases that [[MOS:INFOBOX]] has not been complied with and details are in the infobox but not in the main article body. I myself would like to be able to collapse them after skimming them, especially on mobile. But I'm not sure what the lowest-overhead method is to inject the <code>mw-collapsible</code> class (it doesn't work with either of [[#s#Collapsible code cleanup|the other two classes for collapsibility]]). I have to wonder why infoboxes do not already have this class, uncollapsed by default; I would have thought that would have been implemented immediately. (That said, there is for now a minor display bug with making them collapsible, as I've documented and demoed at [[Template talk:Infobox#Minor bug]].)
I suspect that someone has already worked this out, however, given how many people hate infoboxes. (I'm not among them, but the constant activism by some against infoboxes has led to multiple ArbCom cases, and will lead to more of them, because the anti-infobox warring has not abated. The only solution is to make it easy to move them "out of the way" to remove the inspiration for people's "cleanse" infoboxes from WP or from articles particular wikiprojects where these people have gathered are claiming scope.) <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 13:02, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
:I used to like infoboxes, but their proliferation has gotten a bit absurd ({{tl|Infobox fictional artifact}}, {{tl|Infobox ambulance company}}, {{tl|Infobox Magic: The Gathering player}}). I also hate how no matter how complex and nuanced a subject is, someone will insist that it can be boiled into an infobox. Anyway, thanks for making them easier to hide. [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] ([[User talk:Kaldari|talk]]) 04:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
== Fix for Windows XP Unicode font rendering ==
{{ping|Edokter|TheDJ}} Should we remove the following hack:
/**
* Fix for Windows XP Unicode font rendering
*/
if ( navigator.appVersion.search(/windows nt 5/i) !== -1 ) {
mw.util.addCSS( '.IPA { font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode", "Arial Unicode MS"; } ' +
'.Unicode { font-family: "Arial Unicode MS", "Lucida Sans Unicode"; } ' );
}
* XP + IE6: can't reach Wikipedia because of HTTPS issues.
* XP + IE7: isn't served Javascript anymore ([[Help:Internet Explorer]]).
* XP + IE8: might still benefit from this, but is an unsupported browser.
* XP + Chome: Chrome will drop XP support April 2016.
* XP + Firefox: doesn't need this hack.
* XP + Opera: see below
Wikimedia traffic statistics from '''June 2015''' [https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm OS] [https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportClients.htm Browser]:
* XP: 3.88%
* IE6: 0.25% (today 0%)
* IE7: 0.63% (XP + Vista)
* IE8: 1.28% (XP + Vista + Win7)
* Chrome: 29.20% (all OS'es)
* Firefox: 10.16% (all OS'es)
* Opera: 0.47% (all OS'es)
—''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 13:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
: Current OS usage is Windows XP 11%, Windows 10 13%, and Windows 7 52%. IE 6+ is listed as "basic" on [[mw:Compatibility#Browser support matrix]], while IE9 is at "modern". Microsoft dropped IE8, IE9, and IE10 support in January 2016 [http://www.infoworld.com/article/3020534/security/microsoft-will-end-support-for-internet-explorer8-9-and-10.html].
: <rant> Apple's Phil Schiller commented that 600 million people using 5+ year old PCs is "sad". Silicon Valley can shove its glossy plastic up its own ass. There's no way Android 2.3 (supported at "Modern") is more competent than WinXP. — [[User:Dispenser|Dispenser]] 16:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
:Let's wait until the TfD is concluded. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 16:25, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
: {{ping|Ruud Koot|Dispenser|Edokter}} Actually, Windows XP is currently about 2.5% of our page views (across all Wikimedia sites); data for the latest week I can grab:
<div style="margin-left: 2em; border: 1px solid black; padding: 0.5em; width:30em;">
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+ Client OS breakdown for Wikimedia sites by number of page views;<br/>week of 2016-03-06
!OS family
!OS Major version
!View count
!%age
|-
|Windows
|7
|868756774
|23.29%
|-
|iOS
|9
|508433926
|13.63%
|-
|Other
|—
|417183368
|11.18%
|-
|Android
|4
|377281000
|10.11%
|-
|Android
|5
|321741918
|8.63%
|-
|Windows
|10
|320880388
|8.60%
|-
|Mac OS X
|10
|228521486
|6.13%
|-
|Windows
|8.1
|211357335
|5.67%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|94813298
|2.54%
|-
|iOS
|8
|82654297
|2.22%
|-
|Windows
|8
|41066156
|1.10%
|-
|iOS
|7
|35716851
|0.96%
|-
|Windows Phone
|8
|32697298
|0.88%
|-
|Linux
|—
|28230607
|0.76%
|-
|Windows
|Vista
|25243248
|0.68%
|-
|Android
|6
|22777455
|0.61%
|-
|Android
|—
|21188423
|0.57%
|-
|Android
|2
|19362537
|0.52%
|-
|Windows
|98
|18204450
|0.49%
|-
|Chrome OS
|7647
|12346421
|0.33%
|-
|Windows CE
|—
|11172571
|0.30%
|-
|Ubuntu
|—
|9423933
|0.25%
|-
|iOS
|6
|6499229
|0.17%
|-
|iOS
|5
|4070489
|0.11%
|-
|BlackBerry OS
|10
|3454541
|0.09%
|-
|Mac OS X
|—
|3409944
|0.09%
|-
|BlackBerry OS
|7
|2168252
|0.06%
|-
|Windows
|—
|821651
|0.02%
|-
|Windows Phone
|10
|588133
|0.02%
|}</div>
: Also, note that IE8 doesn't get JavaScript either any more, as of a few months ago. [[User:Jdforrester (WMF)|Jdforrester (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Jdforrester (WMF)|talk]]) 16:58, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
::Is that all sites? Do we also have stats for only en.wiki, to which this issue applies? <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 17:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Edokter}} Yes, all sites, as I said. I don't have data specific to enwiki, though I'd be very surprised if it was significantly different. [[User:Jdforrester (WMF)|Jdforrester (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Jdforrester (WMF)|talk]]) 17:46, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
:::: I often hear large parts China still use XP, so that may inflate global XP usage, which may be significantly less for en.wiki-only stats. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 18:56, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Jdforrester (WMF)}} Can you also find out how many people are using (Chrome OR Opera) AND XP (preferably for enwiki)? —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 17:20, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Ruud Koot}} Sure:
<div style="margin-left: 6em; border: 1px solid black; padding: 0.5em; width:50em;">
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+ Windows XP client browser breakdown for users of Wikimedia sites by number of page views;<br>week of 2016-03-06
!OS family
!OS Major version
!Browser family
!Browser Major version
!View count
!%age
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Chrome
|48
|35782447
|0.9593%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Firefox
|44
|18254339
|0.4894%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|IE
|6
|11850466
|0.3177%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|IE
|8
|7500474
|0.2011%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|IE
|7
|3946780
|0.1058%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Chrome
|49
|3648520
|0.0978%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Other
|—
|2539410
|0.0681%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Firefox
|45
|2395051
|0.0642%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Opera
|35
|2322165
|0.0623%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Firefox
|6
|2226261
|0.0597%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Opera
|12
|2158470
|0.0579%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Firefox
|43
|1410874
|0.0378%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Opera
|32
|415351
|0.0111%
|-
|Windows
|XP
|Firefox
|3
|362690
|0.0097%
|}
</div>
: Hope this helps. [[User:Jdforrester (WMF)|Jdforrester (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Jdforrester (WMF)|talk]]) 17:46, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Isn't a more future-proof solution to just apply "sans-serif" (or "serif") everywhere? [[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 10:28, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
:That is already the case (in Vector). This is about removing any forced fonts for unicode (and the template). <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 11:23, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
This currently affects up to 1.1% of users weighted by page views. Shall we wait 2 or 3 more months until Chrome on XP is really dead and this may fall under 1%? —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 20:34, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
:As I noted above; if countries like China contribute to these numbers (by way of visits to cn.wiki), XP usage be be inflated. That is why I am hoping to see some numbers specific to en.wiki. I suspect it would dive under 1%. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 11:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
As Windows XP is no longer supported, I have removed the font declarations. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 18:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
:It might no longer be supported by Microsoft, but that doesn't mean that people have stopped using it. My hardware is not capable of running anything that is (a) more recent and (b) reliable. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 20:41, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
::Are you referring to Unicode or IPA? Unicode was removed weeks ago. Anyway, MS dropped support two years ago, and browsers that need this (Chrome) have dropped support as well. If you use Firefox, you should be OK. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {{[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]}}</code> 21:35, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
:::I'm referring to XP, as in "As Windows XP is no longer supported". I use Firefox mostly, sometimes Opera. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 22:42, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
| |||