WorthyMV.
Needs to fit into the ecosystem that has enabled the fantastic growth and success of Wiki:
- Light weight. Conducive to relatively easy organic change and growth. Responsive to the needs of the community. Changes can be experimented with and created by volunteers. May be supported by paid developers, but doesn't require a major dedicated developer team to make changes. Keep things simple, using native browser capabilities provide an easy, universally familiar interface.
Here's my code for a WorthyMV:
It doesn't have the gloss and glitz of Media Viewer, but it is vastly superior in many ways. It's conducive to organic change and growth. It's light weight. Minor changes or even major redesigns can easily be implemented by a volunteer with basic HTML experience. The simplicity makes it bug-free, and when changes are made those changes are either bug-free or easily addressed. It can quickly and easily respond to changing needs and wants in a very Wiki way. It is incredibly familiar to anyone who has used the internet. It immediately displays the image at actual resolution (Media Viewer fails). The native browser scroll bar immediately and intuitively gives the user access to the over-size image. The browser scroll bar gives easy immediate and intuitive access to extended information. The formatted Description information is VASTLY superior to the badly-butchered description presented by Media Viewer. Particularly notable is the fact that simply clicking the image brings it to full screen view - one of the top complaints found in the Media Viewer survey was that the interface was confusing - many many users struggled or FAILED to find any way to get a simple full screen view. Another major complaint found in the media viewer survey was that Media Viewer made of mess of the browser history. My WorthyMV does exactly what users expect when they use the browser BACK button - it simply backs up from the current web page to the previous webpage. It is also Futureproof. When the next generation of devices and web tools come along, they will ALL be designed to provide good support for my WorthyMV. We won't be throwing out a heavyweight Media Viewer and start from scratch building another heavyweight MediaViewer2.0.
The only downside to my WorthyMV is that it doesn't look like Facebook. And most of the community does not consider that to be a "downside".
My WorthyMV may need to provide better support for mobile, but I think my WorthyMV can be adapted to do so far more easily do so than attempting to do that via a heavyweight Media Viewer. Alsee (talk) 10:16, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Quoting Wil Sinclair, "If it turns out to be a better solution than Media Viewer, then I suggest we create a petition to replace MV with the community's solution." EN:Media_Viewer/June_2014_RfC#Consensus.2Fdisapproval_has_been_established
✓Done. Alsee (talk) 10:29, 10 September 2014 (UTC)