Talk:Ca' d'Oro

I haven't changed "Moorish" references the entry, but I think they are misleading. The "Eastern" look of Venetian Gothic is a reflection of Byzantine practice, and any Islamic influences are more likely from Egypt and the Levant rather than the western Mediterranean. Wetman 21:22, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Importance
rised to top importance as one of the most significant medieval palazzi in Venice. Amandajm (talk) 14:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Rfc about navigation for mobile users
Within Ca' d'Oro in mobile view the navbox Venice landmarks vanishes. The mobile user cannot learn that Ca' Foscari is the next landmark. Using Mediawiki's Extension:ImageMap as in The Last Supper (Leonardo) the mobile user just clicks on the right side of the infobox image. Done. Is this new article navigation mechanic allowed? Ruedi33a (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment - this seems questionable to me; why would readers think that clicking the picture in the infobox would bring them to the alphabetically next article in the topic? The imagemap is used for adding details about specific things in a photo, it's not meant for this kind of navigation. And lastly, this seems like a problem with mobile view, and should be fixed there, not kludged here. Parsecboy (talk) 14:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * CommentI agree with @Parsecboy; we don't need to be kludging individual articles and elements if mobile view itself is to blame for not rendering them properly. Xenophore ; talk 14:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

If we wait until mobile view is fixed, we may wait forever. Is there an actual problem with this method? &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 15:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting we do this to the millions of articles that have navboxes? If not, then it's not a solution either. And what do we do with articles that have multiple navboxes? Who decides what article is next? This is a kludge, plain and simple, and it's not a particularly good one at that. The image doesn't even tell readers what the intended targets are, so we've assumed that blindly clicking a link with no idea what the result will be is helpful to readers...how exactly?
 * And it's not what the ImageMap is for. The point is to annotate images, not introduce random links that have literally nothing to do with the image. If you want to employ a before/after kludge that makes sense, build it into the infobox (like, for instance, Infobox ship does with the |class before= and |class after= parameters). Parsecboy (talk) 18:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting we do this to the millions of articles that have navboxes? - Nope. Your argument is convincing. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 09:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The facts are not correctly described. The caption of the image says: (Clickable image—Click right for next landmark, left for previous, middle for image detail). If the mobile user clicks the left of the image, he will go to a landmark, that is defined by a list. I cannot show the user the navbox as it is invisible. Ruedi33a (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No, you've missed my point; where in your caption does it tell the reader what article they will be taken to? This is a pretty basic WP:EGG situation. Parsecboy (talk) 19:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is possible with less than 1 minute more work as the links are already in the rect statements. The caption would like this: (Clickable image—From left to right: Bridge of Sighs, image details, Ca' Foscari) Ruedi33a (talk) 19:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Then the clickable image is entirely redundant; you've just recreated my suggestion above to build the links into the infobox. Parsecboy (talk) 20:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You are right. Now the links are in the infobox. But I have avoided to request further complications of the code of the infobox building, that seems to have enough parameters. The human factor is also important. If you do not have a mouse and work on a small screen, it is more easy to click an image than a short text. Ruedi33a (talk) 20:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * My new prototype based on your suggestion is within User:Ruedi33a/sandbox. Imagemap is no longer needed as there are only two clickable parts in the caption allowed, the next and the previous article. As they have nearly the same distance as in my former imagemap solution, I found no problem using a fingertip instead of a mouse on a small screen. The mobile user now has a way to get to the next or previous landmark based on the sequence of articles within the invisible navbox of the article. The used caption is:
 * Ca' d'Oro façade overlooking the Grand Canal. The next landmark is Ca' Foscari. Bridge of Sighs is the previous landmark. Ruedi33a (talk) 22:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Am I suggesting we do this to the millions of articles that have navboxes? No. I want to use this tool to make the usage more easy for tourists of Venice, Milano, Verona, ... with mobile devices. There is no suggestion about deleting or migrating the navboxes. They are extremely useful for those who see them. Ruedi33a (talk) 19:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Who decides what article is next? The navbox Venice landmarks. In this case there is only one navbox. Th problem of two or more navboxes is not solved by this concept. But this is no migration concept for navboxes. It is an additional possibility to simplify the usage of our articles by a mobile user, who has no mouse, sees no navbox and only wants to jump to the next landmark. Ruedi33a (talk) 19:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This of course assumes that such readers exist in any significant number. Given that this article gets an average of 77 pageviews a day, and we must assume that only a percentage of those would be interested in navigating between articles as you suggest, how worthwhile is this endeavor? I, for one, would not find this remotely useful if I was visiting a city - these aren't even grouped by location - you'd be criss-crossing the city all day if this was how you scheduled your tour. If all you're trying to accomplish is to allow readers on the mobile view to see related articles, they already can see the list in the see also section. Parsecboy (talk) 20:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The previous article is Bridge of Sighs. It gets an average of 381 pageviews a day plus all the other locations of the Venice landmarks: Arsenal,, Ca' d'Oro, Ca' Foscari, Ca' Pesaro, Ca' Rezzonico, Ca' Vendramin Calergi, Doge's Palace, Gallerie dell'Accademia, Grand Canal, Piazza San Marco, Punta della Dogana, Il Redentore, Rialto Bridge, San Giorgio Maggiore, Santa Maria della Salute, Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, Santi Giovanni e Paolo, St Mark's Basilica. This will be quite a number. And the navbox made sense for the desktop users, in a similar way this structure will help the mobile users. And I really do not want this concept to be a replacement for navigation software or a map. Ruedi33a (talk) 20:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Just a bit more statistical information to get a better feeling for this environment. The tool allows to compare desktop use=123 per day with mobile use=249 per day . This special kind of article has a mobile use of 66%. Ruedi33a (talk) 20:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose First of all it doesn't actually work for me (on my desktop). 2nd, the infobox is NOT the place to initiate a tour of other "landmarks" (selected by who exactly?). The very epitome of cruft. Nearly all these articles need improving - do that instead. I see the Milhist project sent you packing too. Johnbod (talk) 15:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, exactly my opinion. Mobile view might never be fixed. This is an easy, fast solution for the majority of our users. And it applies to a lot of lists: next city, next battle, next team... Ruedi33a (talk) 15:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I have used the invisible Venice landmarks to select the landmarks as it would be the best choice. This is a good requirement: the choice of the next landmark, battle, city must be based on a list or navbox. Ruedi33a (talk) 15:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I have tried it on my notebook(W) without problems. Johnbod, does The Last Supper (Leonardo) work on your notebook?
 * Yes that takes me to the biograpies of the individuals - not very helpfully. The usual names and links would be better. Ruedi33a, you should learn how to format talk page contributions before plastering novel types of template all over Wikipedia! Johnbod (talk) 16:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I am on a notebook now, too. The formatting is really better. I am normally busy with mapframe, the best tool for mobile users I found. On a mobile there is no mouse to click a tiny word, but a fingertip to click an image. The human factor must be taken into account. The mobiles users are the majority. All the incredible work within the navboxes is invisible without a warning for years now with no hope at all for an improvement. This is an easy way to traansport a fraction of the information within the navboxes to the mobuile user. Ruedi33a (talk) 16:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Agreed with the early commenters; this is a problem with Mobile View, and it is not "fixed" by exploiting a bug in Extension:ImageMap (which will probably also get fixed).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * My new prototype is within User:Ruedi33a/sandbox. Imagemap is no longer needed as there are only two clickable parts in the caption allowed, the next and the previous article. As they have nearly the same physical distance compared with my former imagemap solution, I found no problem using a fingertip instead of a mouse on a small screen. The mobile user now has a way to get to the next or previous landmark based on the sequence of articles within the invisible navbox of the article. The proposed new caption structure for mobile users is:

Ca' d'Oro façade overlooking the Grand Canal. The next landmark in Venice is Ca' Foscari. Bridge of Sighs is the previous landmark. Comment: The next and previous landmarks are taken from Venice landmarks Comment: No further link is allowed in the caption to enable mobile users to click the right link without a mouse Ruedi33a (talk) 07:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC) Based on Requests for comment I close this RFC as the poster and remove the. As the suggestion with imagemap was denied I will remove the code where imagemap was used by me. Ruedi33a (talk) 18:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)