Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Maptabs"
From DoomWiki.org
m (→Colored background: New color scheme) |
m (RFC link) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==Call for feedback== | ==Call for feedback== | ||
| + | {{RFC link|title=Doom Wiki:RFC/Maptabs template}} | ||
Since there's at least some disagreement on how this should look, I want to call for discussion so consensus can be established. I will open an RFC if significant input is lacking after a week. Please note that one element of the design which is strictly dictated is the 0.5em border around the image - the <nowiki>[[File:]]</nowiki> directive unfortunately generates a 0.5em bottom border when given "none" as an alignment value and there is no simple way to just turn that off. In order to make it balanced, I gave the inside div 0.5em borders on all other edges. Also please keep in mind that this took a significant amount of effort to design and make work, during which I wasn't given any negative feedback. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 10:34, 26 June 2015 (CDT) | Since there's at least some disagreement on how this should look, I want to call for discussion so consensus can be established. I will open an RFC if significant input is lacking after a week. Please note that one element of the design which is strictly dictated is the 0.5em border around the image - the <nowiki>[[File:]]</nowiki> directive unfortunately generates a 0.5em bottom border when given "none" as an alignment value and there is no simple way to just turn that off. In order to make it balanced, I gave the inside div 0.5em borders on all other edges. Also please keep in mind that this took a significant amount of effort to design and make work, during which I wasn't given any negative feedback. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 10:34, 26 June 2015 (CDT) | ||
: Disagreement was mentioned on IRC so here is my 2¢. Based on the limited feedback our walkthroughs receive, this template would have immediate practical impact for readers, which far outweighs the style concerns described. I personally am fine with the design: the default logged-out layout is quite high contrast already. Even if it's an issue, however, the switching logic must be implemented with obsequious clarity, so any admin can quickly tweak it each time an upgrade or extension scrambles something. IMO such advanced enhancement shouldn't delay initial implementation. [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ([[User talk:Ryan W|talk]]) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (CDT) | : Disagreement was mentioned on IRC so here is my 2¢. Based on the limited feedback our walkthroughs receive, this template would have immediate practical impact for readers, which far outweighs the style concerns described. I personally am fine with the design: the default logged-out layout is quite high contrast already. Even if it's an issue, however, the switching logic must be implemented with obsequious clarity, so any admin can quickly tweak it each time an upgrade or extension scrambles something. IMO such advanced enhancement shouldn't delay initial implementation. [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ([[User talk:Ryan W|talk]]) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 10:27, 16 August 2015
Colored background
I'm not fond of it, I think it only fits when using the Monaco skin (and perhaps Modern/Cologne Blue, but who uses them?). Compare Monaco MonoBook Vector Modern Cologne Blue I'd suggest going instead for a color scheme consistent with the various boxes (pretty tables, TOC, etc.). So background color #F9F9F9, border 1px solid #AAAAAA, square corners, and so on. --Gez (talk) 12:26, 25 June 2015 (CDT)
- The colors could be done on a per-skin basis if it's that much of a problem. To me, it looks OK on all of them. As far as the design goes,t hough, there's no reason we need to stick with a flat Web 1.0 look for everything and I would be opposed to making this have sharp corners. Take a look at any of the NIWA wikis and you'll find better looking templates than most of ours. Some of ours are actually just downright ugly - HTML tables barely disguised with some coloration. An image toggle shouldn't look like an HTML table, as that is neither in its form nor its functionality. For example, see what I did with Template:GamePicsPortal. I believe it is a nice-looking skin-neutral template. --Quasar (talk) 16:52, 25 June 2015 (CDT)
- Please let me know if the new grayscale color scheme is more to your liking. --Quasar (talk) 23:36, 12 August 2015 (CDT)
Call for feedback
 | Request For Comment |
Since there's at least some disagreement on how this should look, I want to call for discussion so consensus can be established. I will open an RFC if significant input is lacking after a week. Please note that one element of the design which is strictly dictated is the 0.5em border around the image - the [[File:]] directive unfortunately generates a 0.5em bottom border when given "none" as an alignment value and there is no simple way to just turn that off. In order to make it balanced, I gave the inside div 0.5em borders on all other edges. Also please keep in mind that this took a significant amount of effort to design and make work, during which I wasn't given any negative feedback. --Quasar (talk) 10:34, 26 June 2015 (CDT)
- Disagreement was mentioned on IRC so here is my 2¢. Based on the limited feedback our walkthroughs receive, this template would have immediate practical impact for readers, which far outweighs the style concerns described. I personally am fine with the design: the default logged-out layout is quite high contrast already. Even if it's an issue, however, the switching logic must be implemented with obsequious clarity, so any admin can quickly tweak it each time an upgrade or extension scrambles something. IMO such advanced enhancement shouldn't delay initial implementation. Ryan W (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (CDT)
