Site thumbnail help text

[allanaaa]

When users choose a thumbnail for their site, they choose it from assets or upload a new one.

We should include help text to say that site thumbnails should be square and small (maybe 240x240px maximum) and point out that they will be displayed on the default homepage list-of-sites, and in the "Sites list" page block. The default homepage displays them at 240x240px, while the page block varies by theme but is always smaller than that.

[kimisgold]

How about

Choose or upload a thumbnail to display with site. Thumbnails should be a uniform aspect ratio. They appear in the public default list of sites view, as well as the "list of sites" page block.

[allanaaa]

I don't think "uniform aspect ratio" means anything.

Choose or upload a thumbnail to display with this site. Thumbnails should be square and small. They appear at a maximum of 240px by 240px in the public default list of sites view, and smaller in the "list of sites" page block.

[zerocrates]

I think the idea with uniform was that, whatever you choose it should be the same between sites. There isn't really a problem if they're not square, is there?

[allanaaa]

The only use is square, so why not tell people exactly what they need to know?

This is the user manual version:

Upload a thumbnail for your site, or select one from your installation's assets, which will appear alongside the summary text on the landing page and in the list of sites page block. We recommend using a small square image, no more than 240 by 240 pixels (the largest it will display, on the landing page). You can also set a favicon for your site later.

[zerocrates]

When you say the only use is square, what do you mean? They're not actually restricted to square as far as I'm aware.

[allanaaa]

Oh, I thought I saw that in the CSS. Okay, it's "max-width:15rem" (240px) on the homepage, and "max-height:72px" in the list of sites page block.

There are no limits at all on height and width respectively, so you can end up with stuff like this?

We have the overflow set to hidden on the page block, so at least it's not pushing the page width out. But it does mean you can't read any of the text.

[zerocrates]

I could see an argument for having max restrictions on both dimensions but I'm not overly worried about it, definitely not in a "this needs fixing before release" sense.

[zerocrates]

In the realm of what the appropriate text here is... do we need anything? The relative lack of restrictions makes me think that pithy guidance isn't so achievable here. Even the 240 pixels aspect is something that would vary based on if you wanted to cater to high DPI viewers, etc.

[allanaaa]

I suppose not. I think the whole "site thumbnail" concept has always been kind of ambiguous, in terms of where it is actually used. Now that we have favicons too I just think it needs more clarity.