[08:42:32] I gave a mostly-informal talk (in English) with my ideas about Global templates at a recent only Catalan Wikimedia community event: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amir_Aharoni_%22Global_Templates,_Now%22_-_Viquitrobada_2020.webm [08:43:18] I mention Abstract Wikipedia there a few times. Most prominently, starting at 0:33, and also a few times before that. [08:43:29] Please correct me if I'm saying anything terribly wrong there. [08:45:07] The video quality gets not so good at the point when I'm talking about Abstract Wikipeda, but the audio is perfect, and you can see the slides with perfect quality here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Plantilles_globals_Viquitrobada_2020.pdf [08:45:07] (It's probably my fault that the video is not great because I played with my camera for no good reason.) [08:45:25] Thanks to Marc for organizing this event and uploading the video! [08:45:34] Sorry but the sound is terrible and the speech is accelerated (and no transcription), I can hear almost no word. [08:46:12] All of it? The first couple of minutes are in Catalan, but the rest is in English. (re @Philippe: Sorry but the sound is terrible and the speech is accelerated (and no transcription), I can hear almost no word.) [08:46:17] Sorry but the sound is terrible and the speech is accelerated (and no transcription, plus some non-native English accent I'm not familiar with), I can hear almost no word. [08:46:49] Can you post a written transcript ? [08:47:34] Sorry, I'm too busy with work and family to make it myself. But the slides at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Plantilles_globals_Viquitrobada_2020.pdf have almost everything. (re @Philippe: Can you post a written transcript ?) [08:47:42] Just in the description page of the ideo on Commons [08:50:54] Just in the description page of the video on Commons, I added this link to the PDF [08:55:39] Also I linked the PDF on Commons to this video (also in the "Other versions" field). [10:29:13] Our pleasure, Amir! 🙏 You are always very welcome in the Catalan community. (re @amire80: Thanks to Marc for organizing this event and uploading the video!) [11:15:22] I can hear the presentation OK, your accent sounds good to me at least, thanks [11:15:22] Not related just noted the RTL player control can be tweaked a little (note the progress bar bubble, the pause button location) [11:15:36] https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/cdebdb34/file_1587.jpg [11:15:36] https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/a976d0ba/file_1588.jpg [11:17:36] I can hear the presentation OK, your accent sounds good to me at least, thanks [11:17:37] Not related just noticed the RTL player control can be tweaked a little for RTL UI (note the progress bar bubble, the pause button location) [11:18:18] I can hear the presentation OK, your accent sounds good to me at least, thanks [11:18:18] Not related to the presentation just noticed the RTL player control can be tweaked a little for RTL UI (note the progress bar bubble, the pause button location) [11:18:30] I can hear the presentation OK, your accent sounds good to me at least, thanks [11:18:31] Not related to the presentation just noticed the RTL player control can be tweaked a little for RTL languages UI (note the progress bar bubble, the pause button location) [11:19:15] I can hear the presentation OK, your accent sounds good to me at least, thanks [11:38:15] Thanks. I can speak a bit of Catalan, but not well enough to talk for an hour about a technical topic. My reading and writing in Catalan is better than my speaking, especially when I'm not in a hurry and can use a dictionary. So I did a brief introduction in Catalan, and the rest in English. (re @Django: I can hear the presentation OK, your accent sounds good to me at least, thanks) [11:43:26] I can hear the English part of the presentation OK, your accent sounds good to me at least, thanks [13:56:01] Is a constructor a kind of function? [13:56:57] (If I'm not mistaken, a C++ constructor can be called a function, but I'm asking about Wikilambda of course.) [13:58:54] as far as I understand, yes [14:00:41] Then perhaps the https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Glossary can be updated to reflect this. Currently, the entry for "constructor" doesn't say that it is a function, and my understanding of the current of the entry for "ZObject" is that functions and constructors are different. [14:43:02] The vote has finished at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Wiki_of_functions_naming_contest/Votes [14:43:59] Time for legally verifying the votes [14:44:49] Now, the votes should be validated: users not be blocked on more than one project; and not be a bot; and have made at least 25 edits as of 1 September, 2020 on any public Wikimedia production wiki (like Wikipedia, Commons, Wikisource, etc). [14:47:51] For a first impression, it is clear that the choices are between Wikifunctions, Wikilambda and Wikimedia Functions. [17:13:13] Can we work on the draft for the logo contest? See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Logo [17:13:33] Can we work on the draft for the logo contest? [17:13:40] Can we work on the draft for the logo contest? See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Logo [17:25:58] Can we work on the draft for the logo contest? See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Logo [17:29:51] 🗣 Can we work on the draft for the logo contest? See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Logo [18:11:10] I propose this timeline: [18:11:10] 17 Nov. - 27 Nov.: Legal Review [18:11:12] 28 Nov. - 29 Nov.: Name Announcement [18:11:13] 30 Nov. - 15 Dec.: Call for logo proposals [18:11:15] 15 Dec - 29 Dec. First Round [18:11:16] 30 Dec. - 14 Jan.: Legal Review (re @Philippe: 🗣 Can we work on the draft for the logo contest? See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Logo) [18:12:05] 15 Jan. - 30 Jan.: Second Round [18:12:06] 31 Jan. - 10 Feb.: Legal Review [18:12:07] 11 Feb. - 15 Feb.: Final Results [18:12:09] Actually the timeline is defined by the WMF. We can just help them design the pages. [18:12:44] Actually the timeline is defined by the WMF. We can just help them design the pages (which may then help them accelerate their decision and give more time for testing). [18:12:49] The timeline proposes that we should have a long by Mid-December. [18:13:11] The timeline proposes that we should have a logo by Mid-December. [18:13:22] The timeline of WMF proposes that we should have a logo by Mid-December. [18:13:32] This is not practical. [18:14:24] That's what was written for now in the presentation of the project. The project has just been late by one week for the 2nd round (but then there were technical quirks for the 2nd round: not enough tests which caused toubles) [18:14:33] That's what was written for now in the presentation of the project. The project has just been late by one week for the 2nd round (but then there were technical quirks for the 2nd round: not enough tests which caused troubles) [18:15:40] I thin kthe WMf would appreciate that we, the community prepare the field, and just give some guidelines or instructions if things have to be fixed, or if there are some technical, human or legal constraints. [18:15:54] This implies that several participants would not have enough time to design a logo if we shortly go to the vote. (re @Philippe: That's what was written for now in the presentation of the project. The project has just been late by one week for the 2nd round (but then there were technical quirks for the 2nd round: not enough tests which caused troubles)) [18:16:13] I agree. (re @Philippe: I thin kthe WMf would appreciate that we, the community prepare the field, and just give some guidelines or instructions if things have to be fixed, or if there are some technical, human or legal constraints.) [18:16:34] I think the WMF would appreciate that we, the community prepare the field, and just give some guidelines or instructions if things have to be fixed, or if there are some technical, human or legal constraints. And the best way to test this is to involve a larger community since the begining and provide translartiosn very early: we would have avoided the bug for Arabic/Hebrew users! [18:17:10] So that's why I've made a page online early: a 2-weeks submission period is not enough for logos (it is only acceptable for names) [18:18:08] I think that the best choice is three weeks from the announcement of the name. (re @Philippe: So that's why I've made a page online early: a 2-weeks submission period is not enough for logos (it is only acceptable for names)) [18:18:20] We don't need to wait the official call, we should collect logos early, discuss early about the voting process, the presentation, and prepare the vote. We don't have to depend on one or two paid workers at the WMF (which don't necessarily have the time for that) [18:22:15] I think that a page in Wikimedia Commons with a template for logo submission is be absolutely excellent. (re @Philippe: We don't need to wait the official call, we should collect logos early, discuss early about the voting process, the presentation, and prepare the vote. We don't have to depend on one or two paid workers at the WMF (which don't necessarily have the time for that)) [18:22:25] Also you can easily imagine a name in a few seconds: hundreds people could do that. But there are not hundreds peopel capable of drawing soething that will be technically correct: they can still exchange concepts, and work together to create or fix a design, they'll opt for their best design (or could propose some alternatives if they have no opinion about which could be best). This initial step of creation requires at least [18:23:11] Nice idea. (re @Philippe: Also you can easily imagine a name in a few seconds: hundreds people could do that. But there are not hundreds peopel capable of drawing soething that will be technically correct: they can still exchange concepts, and work together to create or fix a design, they'll opt for their best design (or could propose some alternatives if they have no opinion about which could be best). This initial step of [18:23:49] Just a note concerning the page: The logo is for the wiki of functions and not Abstract Wikipedia. [18:24:51] While that might be true a bit of coordination is surely helpful to not blow up plans. (re @Philippe: We don't need to wait the official call, we should collect logos early, discuss early about the voting process, the presentation, and prepare the vote. We don't have to depend on one or two paid workers at the WMF (which don't necessarily have the time for that)) [18:25:02] +1 (re @Nightrose: While that might be true a bit of coordination is surely helpful to not blow up plans.) [18:25:09] The deadlines have been shifted in the past so I am sure there is room here as well. Just ask for it. [18:25:29] It's not like the people responsible aren't here. [18:26:58] We can also let the process short by helping the vote validation and the count of the results. (re @Nightrose: The deadlines have been shifted in the past so I am sure there is room here as well. Just ask for it.) [18:27:17] *nod* [18:28:11] Let us wait and see what will happen. (re @Nightrose: *nod*) [18:28:57] We can just ask 😉 *poke @vrandecic * [18:29:46] fwiw I'm really looking forward to the logo proposals. the ones we got for wikidata when it started were great. tough choice back then. [18:50:02] I've monitored the votes to avoid obvious duplicates (only by the same user account on the Meta wiki). [18:50:03] I've also checked they used the proper format, and helped users that had some problems. [18:50:04] But full validation requires some admin privileges that I don't have! [18:52:35] I've monitored the votes to avoid obvious duplicates (only by the same user account on the Meta wiki). [18:52:36] I've also checked they used the proper format, and helped users that had some problems. [18:52:37] But full validation requires some admin privileges that I don't have (checking they are not bots or mutliple accounts from the same effective user, though it is not obvious that this occured, as I don't see repeated patterns): this requires checking the actual account for each voter we see publicly, and check their status on all other wikis). [18:53:32] I've monitored the votes to avoid obvious duplicates (only by the same user account on the Meta wiki). [18:53:33] I've also checked they used the proper format, and helped users that had some problems. [18:53:34] But full validation requires some admin privileges that I don't have (checking they are not bots or mutliple accounts from the same effective user, though it is not obvious that this occured, as I don't see repeated patterns): this requires checking the actual account for each voter we see publicly, and check their status on all other wikis: they are not all using Single Sign-In, there remains accounts not under SUL). [18:55:16] To clarify: The timeline on the Naming contest page is just about the Name. The legal review of the name(s) will potentially take a full 4 weeks. [18:55:16] The Logo process won't officially start until January (to give everyone a pause at the end of the calendar year). Some people will start drafting logo design ideas earlier, and that's fine. There have been discussions about it for months already. [18:55:19] But yes, we can work on discussing the process and drafting the page before then! Thanks for starting it Philippe, I'll look at that later this week. [18:55:19] Getting the name decided was the semi-urgent step; having a logo isn't a blocker for anything, but not having a name was! [18:56:13] Note: I've not designed any template to formalize the submission of proposals. I just show one example. [18:56:40] Also the order of appeareance on the page is not randomized (sorry if my proposal comes first...) [18:56:50] (sidenote: Editing of comments in Telegram, results in a duplicate of the entire message being sent to IRC. This can be helpful, or can be a bit spammy. Just FYI! Ty <3 ) [18:57:14] Anyway you can discuss your first concepts on any wiki or external channel before making your proposal [20:38:23] Also I don't think we need the final name to be integrated in the logo. As it was already decided, the name should be easily translatable, so it will be translated when visiting the wiki. I'm not sure it should then be part of the logo, but it could be displayed easily below it in the top corner of the side bar, just as plain text, or PNG could be built automatically with a set of translations and a small template to capture [20:38:24] For indication, the top-corner of the side bar uses a 160x160px icon, but for HiDPI displays, it may be twice that value in each direction. [20:38:25] As well, logos should be suitable for publication as "favicons" (allowing shortcuts to pages on the wiki to be created and viewed at variable sizes: the favicon may be small or large, with multiple resolutions, the browser or the file explorer in the OS, will download the best fitting icon size; a similar icon could be used for shortcuts on mobile devices, that now frequently use HiDPI displays) [20:38:27] We should also say that the logo must not need to be animated (it may be animated later as an optional derivative for very specific uses in interactive presentations). [20:44:44] Also I don't think we need the final name to be integrated in the logo. As it was already decided, the name should be easily translatable, so it will be translated when visiting the wiki. I'm not sure it should then be part of the logo, but it could be displayed easily below it in the top corner of the side bar, just as plain text, or PNG could be built automatically with a set of translations and a small template to capture [20:44:45] For indication, the top-corner of the side bar uses a 160x160px icon, but for HiDPI displays, it may be twice that value in each direction. [20:44:46] As well, logos should be suitable for publication as "favicons" (allowing shortcuts to pages on the wiki to be created and viewed at variable sizes: the favicon may be small or large, with multiple resolutions, the browser or the file explorer in the OS, will download the best fitting icon size; a similar icon could be used for shortcuts on mobile devices, that now frequently use HiDPI displays) [20:44:48] We should also say that the logo must not need to be animated (it may be animated later as an optional derivative for very specific uses in interactive presentations). [20:44:49] So: SVG will probably be needed, but not all proposers will be able to do that, SVG editing is complex, they will ask for help and need time. Any one can help a proposer to provide a SVG version: submitting a proposal on Commons allows them to ask for such help with many good experienced SVG contributors. [20:44:51] It should not be blocking for the vote, as the very few finalist logos may then be SVG'ed at that time. The vote is basically on a concept, and even the SVG could be optimized and fine-tuned later (including for soving some rendering problems on some devices or browsers: at least the SVBG-thumbnailer on Commons should be able to process it and generate PNG versions at various sizes, even if the SVG is not fully optimized; the