3 ms·
The table of content is the bit I like the least. The observation is correct, then entire left hand sidebar of the standard Wikipedia layout isn't actually that
by mrweasel 5y ago
The table of content is the bit I like the least. The observation is correct, then entire left hand sidebar of the standard Wikipedia layout isn't actually that useful. Putting the table of content in the sidebar might be an idea, but why the big bulk font? Just take the normal TOC and move it to the sidebar.
One big thing many could learn from, from the standard Wikipedia, and where this "modern" alternative fails, is the use of icons. Wikipedia mainly use text labels, not icons, which mean that I don't have to guess what the three dots mean. When going to Wikipedia, it very clearly states that I am in fact "Not logged in", this modern UI just have the person icon, but am I logged in? Similarly there's a small clock with an arrow, if I don't understand that Wikipedia is versioned, I have no idea what that does. The "view history" is much more clear, even if "View page history" would be even better.
It's pretty fun to play around with alternative designs for pages like Wikipedia, but actual updates should be done because it improved usability, not because it fails to follow trends that will change in a few years anyway.