6 ms·

Unifying our mobile and desktop domains

191 points by todsacerdoti 11mo ago

janpio 11mo ago
Great job. I was hoping this was a unification of the both layouts as well, that would have been really impressive. The mobile version of the article pages is great, but getting both versions from the same frontend would be an amazing case study.
- bawolff 11mo ago
  The mobile site is relatively unpopular among editors, i think there would be a riot if they did that. That said, there is a "desktop" version of the mobile skin, you can get it by appending ?useskin=minerva to a wikipedia url.
  - Akronymus 11mo ago
    I use that trick to still get the vector layout. No version past that is to my personal liking.
    - bawolff 11mo ago
      If you log in, you can set it in your preferences so its sticky.
- NooneAtAll3 11mo ago
  wdym? isn't "new" pc design that's been around for last couple years pretty much mobile one already? (and thus ugly af)
  - bawolff 11mo ago
    The new one (called vector-2022) is much closer to mobile stylings, but not the same. The mobile skin is called minerva. On top of that the mobile site makes some changes to the content to simplify it, and replaces some elements.
lxgr 11mo ago
Finally! But… > Wikipedia’s use of it is surprising to our present day audience, and it may decrease the perceived strength of domain branding Really? That’s the reasoning, and not the fact that mobile links forwarded to desktop browsers would render the mobile view?!
- pr337h4m 11mo ago
  The mobile view is a really pleasant reading experience on desktop.
  - lxgr 11mo ago
    Admittedly, it does make for some good impromptu neck exercises on any typical screen.
- bawolff 11mo ago
  > Really? That’s the reasoning, and not the fact that mobile links forwarded to desktop browsers would render the mobile view?! If you read the more technical internal rationals instead of just the press release, what you said is mentioned as one of the reasons for the change https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Mobile_domain_sunsetting https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Mobile_d...
- LeoPanthera 11mo ago
  It's surely much less of a problem than most non-technical users wondering why Wikipedia URLs start with "en" instead of "www".
  - autoexec 11mo ago
    I'd be surprised if anyone but the oldest non-technical users had any idea what the "www" was or why it would or wouldn't be at the front of a URL. It takes zero technical knowledge to understand "en" indicates the language and probably rarely comes up since you can use www or omit the en and links mostly just work.
  - 11mo ago
SchemaLoad 11mo ago
About 10 years late, I can't think of any websites other than Wikipedia still doing the mobile domain.
- layer8 11mo ago
  YouTube? Twitch? FaceBook? GSMArena? There are lots.
  - sedatk 11mo ago
    m.youtube.com and m.facebook.com redirect you to main "m-less" domain when on desktop. That was the greatest problem with Wikipedia. You had to experience that mobile layout on desktop unless you edited the address line and reloaded the page.
    - SoKamil 11mo ago
      m.wikipedia.org was a feature, not a bug. The interface is good on desktop. For some time, before Wikipedia did a desktop site rework, this was my go-to frontend.
    - huflungdung 11mo ago
      [dead]
- micromacrofoot 11mo ago
  late for what?
  - sedatk 11mo ago
    Late for fixing design and UX bifurcation.
  - NooneAtAll3 11mo ago
    pc website redirected mobile users from the very beginning mobile website did not redirect pc users 10 years late at fixing this very basic problem
sedatk 11mo ago
That's a welcome development albeit late, but more importantly, they should address the "can't link to a highlight" problem on mobile. When all sections are collapsed by default, browser won't scroll to the relevant section. A random "link to highlight" example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_of_Cyprus#:~:text=On%2010%20June%20Henry%20rewarded%20the%20Genoese%20with%20momentous%20concessions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_of_Cyprus#:~:text=On%2... Such a link doesn't work on mobile if it points inside a collapsed section. That makes directing people to relevant content on mobile really hard, and I end up sending screenshots instead. EDIT: "Link to fragment"s had the same problem, but apparently, they fixed it. Thanks for that too!
- kevin_thibedeau 11mo ago
  You also can't search for text in collapsed sections.
- flexagoon 11mo ago
  The link in your comment works perfectly fine for me in Chrome Android, and highlights the part
  - sedatk 11mo ago
    Ah okay, it's an iOS-specific problem then.
    - batisteo 11mo ago
      For some reason I've got the android app and it won't show the selection. Does the fragment is part of the deep link anyway?
jonny_eh 11mo ago
Now it's your turn YouTube…
porphyra 11mo ago
It was mildly annoying how en.wikipedia.org would redirect to en.m.wikipedia.org on mobile, but en.m.wikipedia.org wouldn't redirect to en.wikipedia.org on desktop. So when a mobile user sent me a link, I had to go and manually delete the '.m' in order to view it nicely. But I guess it makes sense since desktop developers need to be able to see the mobile site sometimes.
- sfRattan 11mo ago
  There was a period I can recall, maybe 2010 to 2020 most prominently, when a subset of HN readers strongly preferred the mobile Wikipedia site, even on desktop, and would always use ".m" linking to Wikipedia articles in comments threads. This also seemed to happen in reddit threads during that decade. I sort of remember some of the older MediaWiki desktop themes looking worse than the mobile theme, but it was never enough for me personally to try always using the mobile site at the time. I do still strongly prefer old.reddit.com... For as long as that portal continues to exist.
  - porphyra 11mo ago
    Yeah, in the olden days, there was no max-width for desktop wikipedia, so the readability was not good.
    - internetter 11mo ago
      I still use the old site and personally prefer it
- Wowfunhappy 11mo ago
  > But I guess it makes sense since desktop developers need to be able to see the mobile site sometimes. IMO this isn't a good reason. Developers can change the user agent. (I also imagine there could be a no-redirect preference for logged in users. Or even just a special query string you could add to the end of a url.)
  - 11mo ago
fowl2 11mo ago
Incredible that no one from Google noticed this as a regression from their side and either put a workaround in or contacted Wikimedia.
westurner 11mo ago
BUG: show the Table of Contents (TOC) in mobile mode Users probably especially want to deep link to #headings on mobile devices
bhouston 11mo ago
Nice engineering work and very clear write-up. I love these types of optimizations. BTW found this writeup on the Wikipedia CDN: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/CDN https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/CDN
xnx 11mo ago
Subdomains for mobile sites were almost as dumb as www2 www3 for load balancing.

191 points by todsacerdoti 11mo ago

janpio 11mo ago

Great job. I was hoping this was a unification of the both layouts as well, that would have been really impressive. The mobile version of the article pages is great, but getting both versions from the same frontend would be an amazing case study.

bawolff 11mo ago
The mobile site is relatively unpopular among editors, i think there would be a riot if they did that. That said, there is a "desktop" version of the mobile skin, you can get it by appending ?useskin=minerva to a wikipedia url.
- Akronymus 11mo ago
  I use that trick to still get the vector layout. No version past that is to my personal liking.
  - bawolff 11mo ago
    If you log in, you can set it in your preferences so its sticky.
NooneAtAll3 11mo ago
wdym? isn't "new" pc design that's been around for last couple years pretty much mobile one already? (and thus ugly af)
- bawolff 11mo ago
  The new one (called vector-2022) is much closer to mobile stylings, but not the same. The mobile skin is called minerva. On top of that the mobile site makes some changes to the content to simplify it, and replaces some elements.

lxgr 11mo ago

Finally! But… > Wikipedia’s use of it is surprising to our present day audience, and it may decrease the perceived strength of domain branding Really? That’s the reasoning, and not the fact that mobile links forwarded to desktop browsers would render the mobile view?!

pr337h4m 11mo ago
The mobile view is a really pleasant reading experience on desktop.
- lxgr 11mo ago
  Admittedly, it does make for some good impromptu neck exercises on any typical screen.
bawolff 11mo ago
> Really? That’s the reasoning, and not the fact that mobile links forwarded to desktop browsers would render the mobile view?! If you read the more technical internal rationals instead of just the press release, what you said is mentioned as one of the reasons for the change https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Mobile_domain_sunsetting https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Mobile_d...
LeoPanthera 11mo ago
It's surely much less of a problem than most non-technical users wondering why Wikipedia URLs start with "en" instead of "www".
- autoexec 11mo ago
  I'd be surprised if anyone but the oldest non-technical users had any idea what the "www" was or why it would or wouldn't be at the front of a URL. It takes zero technical knowledge to understand "en" indicates the language and probably rarely comes up since you can use www or omit the en and links mostly just work.
- 11mo ago

SchemaLoad 11mo ago

About 10 years late, I can't think of any websites other than Wikipedia still doing the mobile domain.

layer8 11mo ago
YouTube? Twitch? FaceBook? GSMArena? There are lots.
- sedatk 11mo ago
  m.youtube.com and m.facebook.com redirect you to main "m-less" domain when on desktop. That was the greatest problem with Wikipedia. You had to experience that mobile layout on desktop unless you edited the address line and reloaded the page.
  - SoKamil 11mo ago
    m.wikipedia.org was a feature, not a bug. The interface is good on desktop. For some time, before Wikipedia did a desktop site rework, this was my go-to frontend.
  - huflungdung 11mo ago
    [dead]
micromacrofoot 11mo ago
late for what?
- sedatk 11mo ago
  Late for fixing design and UX bifurcation.
- NooneAtAll3 11mo ago
  pc website redirected mobile users from the very beginning mobile website did not redirect pc users 10 years late at fixing this very basic problem

sedatk 11mo ago

That's a welcome development albeit late, but more importantly, they should address the "can't link to a highlight" problem on mobile. When all sections are collapsed by default, browser won't scroll to the relevant section. A random "link to highlight" example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_of_Cyprus#:~:text=On%2010%20June%20Henry%20rewarded%20the%20Genoese%20with%20momentous%20concessions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_of_Cyprus#:~:text=On%2... Such a link doesn't work on mobile if it points inside a collapsed section. That makes directing people to relevant content on mobile really hard, and I end up sending screenshots instead. EDIT: "Link to fragment"s had the same problem, but apparently, they fixed it. Thanks for that too!

kevin_thibedeau 11mo ago
You also can't search for text in collapsed sections.
flexagoon 11mo ago
The link in your comment works perfectly fine for me in Chrome Android, and highlights the part
- sedatk 11mo ago
  Ah okay, it's an iOS-specific problem then.
  - batisteo 11mo ago
    For some reason I've got the android app and it won't show the selection. Does the fragment is part of the deep link anyway?

jonny_eh 11mo ago

Now it's your turn YouTube…

porphyra 11mo ago

It was mildly annoying how en.wikipedia.org would redirect to en.m.wikipedia.org on mobile, but en.m.wikipedia.org wouldn't redirect to en.wikipedia.org on desktop. So when a mobile user sent me a link, I had to go and manually delete the '.m' in order to view it nicely. But I guess it makes sense since desktop developers need to be able to see the mobile site sometimes.

sfRattan 11mo ago
There was a period I can recall, maybe 2010 to 2020 most prominently, when a subset of HN readers strongly preferred the mobile Wikipedia site, even on desktop, and would always use ".m" linking to Wikipedia articles in comments threads. This also seemed to happen in reddit threads during that decade. I sort of remember some of the older MediaWiki desktop themes looking worse than the mobile theme, but it was never enough for me personally to try always using the mobile site at the time. I do still strongly prefer old.reddit.com... For as long as that portal continues to exist.
- porphyra 11mo ago
  Yeah, in the olden days, there was no max-width for desktop wikipedia, so the readability was not good.
  - internetter 11mo ago
    I still use the old site and personally prefer it
Wowfunhappy 11mo ago
> But I guess it makes sense since desktop developers need to be able to see the mobile site sometimes. IMO this isn't a good reason. Developers can change the user agent. (I also imagine there could be a no-redirect preference for logged in users. Or even just a special query string you could add to the end of a url.)
- 11mo ago

fowl2 11mo ago

Incredible that no one from Google noticed this as a regression from their side and either put a workaround in or contacted Wikimedia.

westurner 11mo ago

BUG: show the Table of Contents (TOC) in mobile mode Users probably especially want to deep link to #headings on mobile devices

bhouston 11mo ago

Nice engineering work and very clear write-up. I love these types of optimizations. BTW found this writeup on the Wikipedia CDN: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/CDN https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/CDN

xnx 11mo ago

Subdomains for mobile sites were almost as dumb as www2 www3 for load balancing.