Talk:The Kim Stanley Robinson Encyclopedia
From The Kim Stanley Robinson Encyclopedia
[edit]
Well, what d'ya think?
Please say you like it! Carlos 07:26, 6 August 2006 (MDT)
- Beautiful! thoreaubred 18:48, 6 August 2006 (MDT)
- But just remember to leave flexibility for stuff like Featured Article and a more detailed directory of the sections of the site. thoreaubred 18:49, 6 August 2006 (MDT)
- Beautiful indeed! Nice work on the globe photo. But I guess this means we're sticking to a pure white background? --Orodromeus 03:05, 7 August 2006 (MDT)
- No, keen to experiment with colour schemes. See my post here about how you can experiment with User styles to try things out on your own. thoroeaubred, any attempts at a banner yet? (NB. Having said that, I'd probably be keen to keep the actual main article background white, and just tweak the banner and sidebar, so it's more of a 'trim' than a full-on paintjob. Black text on white bg is the easiest for reading a lot of information on a screen.) Carlos 03:25, 7 August 2006 (MDT)
- I did start to play around with a background in Photoshop but, as you pointed out, there is very little viewable space up top, something I hadn't fully realized until you pointed it out. My first shot at the idea I had in mind didn't look as good as my mental picture, but I haven't worked on it in a few days. I'm multitasking between all this different stuff and graphics are a relatively low priority for me. If you want to see something up there really soon you might want to have your own go at it. I'll try to work on it again soon though. thoreaubred 03:38, 7 August 2006 (MDT)
- No, keen to experiment with colour schemes. See my post here about how you can experiment with User styles to try things out on your own. thoroeaubred, any attempts at a banner yet? (NB. Having said that, I'd probably be keen to keep the actual main article background white, and just tweak the banner and sidebar, so it's more of a 'trim' than a full-on paintjob. Black text on white bg is the easiest for reading a lot of information on a screen.) Carlos 03:25, 7 August 2006 (MDT)
- Beautiful indeed! Nice work on the globe photo. But I guess this means we're sticking to a pure white background? --Orodromeus 03:05, 7 August 2006 (MDT)
- But just remember to leave flexibility for stuff like Featured Article and a more detailed directory of the sections of the site. thoreaubred 18:49, 6 August 2006 (MDT)
[edit]
Homepage layout
I'd like to make an initial attempt at a homepage for this site, similar to the one I did for The Mars Trilogy Encyclopedia, but with a few more useful links and info like Newest Articles and total number of articles (Currently: 42). Any suggestions/comments before I start. It'll probably be a day or two before I have time, so if anyone else wants a crack first, then go right ahead. Check out these site first though for some ideas, and let us know what you like/don't like about them:
- Lord of the Rings
- Star Wars
- and many others at Wikia
Obviously the 'Featured article' sections are a nice feature, but clearly we need more substantial articles before we can Feature them. Carlos 20:43, 2 August 2006 (MDT)
- Those two examples are pretty similar, both having a featured article as well as contents or a directory of categories/major articles. I would like to have all that, though as you mentioned we'll have to wait a bit on the featured article. I also like how at the top they say how many articles they have and the day they were established. On the Star Wars one, I like the image above the search field. I'd like to customize the look of our wiki as much as possible. I can't think of anything else right now. Directory and featured article seem to be the main components of a typical home page. thoreaubred 06:42, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Also, an updated version of the current logo as a transparent GIF so that the background shows around the planet the way it shows around the Wikipedia ball logo. And a new background altogether. thoreaubred 06:43, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Transparent Gifs don't support partial transparency which would be needed for it to work nicely (the transparent banner and anti-aliased edges require it). The nice solution would be to use an alpha-channeled PNG, but - surprise, surprise - there's one major browser that doesn't support transparent PNGs properly. I think you can guess which one that is!!!::
- The practical solution would be to wait until we've got a new background and then make the logo have the same colour background so it blends in. Carlos 06:54, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Also, an updated version of the current logo as a transparent GIF so that the background shows around the planet the way it shows around the Wikipedia ball logo. And a new background altogether. thoreaubred 06:43, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Ah, forgive my reference to the archaic GIF. Though I'm still pretty computer literate, I gave up on keeping up with techie stuff many years ago. Regarding PNGs, I have seen them in IE, but I don't know if I've seen transparent ones. If you want to upload a test one I could tell you how it looks on my end. As for the background, I would like to have something that isn't just a solid color, but has a subtle design the way the Wikipedia one does. Speaking of which, how is the Wikipedia logo transparent in IE--is it a GIF? What about GIFs wouldn't work for us? thoreaubred 19:23, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- I think the Wikipedia ball has the BG in the image and it lines up with the main background, so there is no transparency involved. GIFs are no good for anything other than the most basic transparency, as it doesn't support partial transparency. (See here for further explanation). Once we've got a background we like, I can alter the logo to blend in with it using this 'lining up' fake transparency technique. Carlos 19:39, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Ah, forgive my reference to the archaic GIF. Though I'm still pretty computer literate, I gave up on keeping up with techie stuff many years ago. Regarding PNGs, I have seen them in IE, but I don't know if I've seen transparent ones. If you want to upload a test one I could tell you how it looks on my end. As for the background, I would like to have something that isn't just a solid color, but has a subtle design the way the Wikipedia one does. Speaking of which, how is the Wikipedia logo transparent in IE--is it a GIF? What about GIFs wouldn't work for us? thoreaubred 19:23, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- And it stays lined up regardless of people's screen resolution and all that? thoreaubred 19:45, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yep, the bg image and the logo are both laid out in absolute pixels from the left/top, so that won't be a problem. Carlos 19:47, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Great. Now to just think of what would make a good background...
- P.S. I didn't even realize the background on Wikipedia was just a header up at the top. Should we go that route rather than a tiling background that fills the screen, or a large single image that fills the screen? I was thinking of something with color in it rather than gray. But maybe a header that blends into a solid background color below would be doable... thoreaubred 19:52, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- I don't have any strong ideas, but I would just say 'SUBTLE!'. Also, remember that it only shows up the top and left (the areas which are currently very pale grey), and the main content area covers it up. I'd use that Wikipedia one (here) as a template and make something of equivalent size. Carlos 20:01, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yep, the bg image and the logo are both laid out in absolute pixels from the left/top, so that won't be a problem. Carlos 19:47, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- And it stays lined up regardless of people's screen resolution and all that? thoreaubred 19:45, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yes, I want something subtle as well. Definitely not something in vivid color like at The Demimonde, which is a whole different atmosphere. I was thinking very subtle, very pastel colors, a subtle abstract design (or maybe not abstract but something simple like a sky or something) like the Wikipedia one. thoreaubred 20:05, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- I guess a thin solid colour bar with a straghtforward gradient blend into the existing pale grey could do. Carlos 20:09, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- What do you think about a collage of cover art (the hill from Three Californias, a domed city from Red Mars, the capital from Fifty Degrees Below, etc.) stretching across the top of the page, with saturation and lightness adjusted to make it just barely there. I'm gonna work on something like that so you can see what I mean. We can get away with cover art under fair use, right? thoreaubred 20:12, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Sounds good. There's not a lot of room the top though. Give it a whirl though. Carlos 20:15, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- BTW, if you're testing, did you see my explanation of User Styles here? Carlos 20:31, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- I hadn't read that but I have now. Thanks. thoreaubred 20:49, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- What do you think about a collage of cover art (the hill from Three Californias, a domed city from Red Mars, the capital from Fifty Degrees Below, etc.) stretching across the top of the page, with saturation and lightness adjusted to make it just barely there. I'm gonna work on something like that so you can see what I mean. We can get away with cover art under fair use, right? thoreaubred 20:12, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- I guess a thin solid colour bar with a straghtforward gradient blend into the existing pale grey could do. Carlos 20:09, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yes, I want something subtle as well. Definitely not something in vivid color like at The Demimonde, which is a whole different atmosphere. I was thinking very subtle, very pastel colors, a subtle abstract design (or maybe not abstract but something simple like a sky or something) like the Wikipedia one. thoreaubred 20:05, 3 August 2006 (MDT)
Hey, by the way, looking at that Star Wars wiki, they sure have a lot of copyrighted material plastered all over the place. I thought several years back there was a big controvery with George Lucs went after all the Star Wars fan sites on the internet and said they couldn't use all the copyrighted images and stuff they had been using. Do we know how this Star Wars wiki gets away with it? Do wikis have more of a claim to fair use than other sites? It seems like if they can get away with all that then we should be able to get away with scanning maps out of the books and pretty much everything else. thoreaubred 06:32, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yet another comment on the Star Wars one: I didn't notice it the first time I looked but they have a directory of Real-world Categories and In-universe Categories on their home page. Interesting. Looks like they have a compromise similar to what we're trying to work out. thoreaubred 06:38, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yes, and it's a very reasonably compromise once you think about it. Heck, it's not even really a compromise - there's not really any other sensible way to go about it. Imagine trying to write character and history articles from an exclusively real world POV - you couldn't go into any detail about characters' motivations, emotions or talk about events in terms of their causes and effects. Ughh. Carlos 07:07, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yes, but you could go the other way--strictly in-universe--if you wanted to. It's just that then you would be squandering all the value in studying the works from the outside. thoreaubred 07:17, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- That's *exactly* whaat I was trying to convey, badly it seems, over our Demimonde discussions: 2 separate directories for in-universe and ext-universe articles. Orodromeus 07:22, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- I'm not sure two seperate directories will work, as many things will have in-universe and real world stuff on the same article. Carlos 07:58, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- Yes, and it's a very reasonably compromise once you think about it. Heck, it's not even really a compromise - there's not really any other sensible way to go about it. Imagine trying to write character and history articles from an exclusively real world POV - you couldn't go into any detail about characters' motivations, emotions or talk about events in terms of their causes and effects. Ughh. Carlos 07:07, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- I haven't said anything on the copyright issues. Have you explored around the net a bit? Movies captures, sound files, character names, promotional pictures, everything is used in fan sites. Nobody cares much anymore. Some people, George Lucas and Fox Television notably, had tried to shut down fansites with copyrighted material a while ago. But the trend today is, since the fans do the promotion for them we can close our eyes on copyrighted material. So I say, we use anything we want, we credit it, and if a complaint pops up -- which is very unlikely IMHO -- we take the specific image offline. I frankly don't think we take big risks by doing so. A full site being taken offline without warning, especially for so much low-profile things as a wiki on a literary author, is not to be forseen. So, who wants to sacrifice his copies to scan these Mars maps? --Orodromeus 07:22, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- Oh yeah, I'm not worried about being shut down or anything. The worst that could happen is that we are asked to remove them, in which case we will. However, I think in general, if we can do it without using copyright where possible we should make the effort. I just don't want every second page having blatantly ripped-off material all over it. At least these are books, not movies, so we don't have to have 50 million screen captures! Carlos 07:58, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- I haven't said anything on the copyright issues. Have you explored around the net a bit? Movies captures, sound files, character names, promotional pictures, everything is used in fan sites. Nobody cares much anymore. Some people, George Lucas and Fox Television notably, had tried to shut down fansites with copyrighted material a while ago. But the trend today is, since the fans do the promotion for them we can close our eyes on copyrighted material. So I say, we use anything we want, we credit it, and if a complaint pops up -- which is very unlikely IMHO -- we take the specific image offline. I frankly don't think we take big risks by doing so. A full site being taken offline without warning, especially for so much low-profile things as a wiki on a literary author, is not to be forseen. So, who wants to sacrifice his copies to scan these Mars maps? --Orodromeus 07:22, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
- Heh, the frustrating thing for me about everyone talking about how fan sites should be fine getting away with all this stuff under fair use is that in this thread on the Demimonde I said many of the same things and got the impression that people thought I was being naive and foolish. It's ironic that I've become one of the more paranoid people about this stuff while everyone else seems to think we should use whatever we want. thoreaubred 18:35, 4 August 2006 (MDT)
