Doom Wiki:RFC/Maptabs template
I would like to advance the status of discussion on Template:Maptabs, for which I requested additional input over the last couple of months but have received no additional replies. I recently revised Common.css to give the widget a less gaudy grayscale color scheme that should be skin neutral.
- It's better now. The question of rounded corner vs. angled corner remains, though; personally I would prefer a uniform style -- it doesn't matter to me whether it's rounded corners on everything, or square corners on everything, I just want it to be consistent. I have pretty much nothing further to say. --Gez (talk) 07:05, 21 August 2015 (CDT)
- I agree that the big rounded corners look out of place, but there is (at least) one other area that already employs rounded corners: the User Page & Discussion tabs atop a user page. The border-radius is 7px there, much smaller than the 1em used in the maptabs template. Applying this value temporarily (via Firebug) to CSS class "dw-tab" makes them look fine IMO, and I'd prefer them to completely rectangular corners. Quasar, could you apply that value so that others can easily review it? Then maybe we can wrap up this RFC soonish. :) --Xymph (talk) 15:51, 24 April 2016 (CDT)
- The element to which you refer is skin-specific and only appears in the Monaco skin, which is this site's default. Many of our users dislike that skin however and use the older standard MediaWiki MonoBook theme instead, which uses strictly square tabs with no more than 1px borders. Redoing the CSS to be more neutral is not impossible, but the current look is not inspired by nor meant to look in place only within Monaco to begin with. Monaco still has mostly square borders as well. However rounded borders do not have to be an all-or-nothing thing; why not use them where they are OK or appropriate? I already unrepentently used them to create Template:GamePicsPortal and will not be undoing the styling on that component as I think it looks very cool personally. --Quasar (talk) 22:28, 24 April 2016 (CDT)
- I hadn't realized there are multiple skins that look rather different; that makes it harder to please all people all the time. :) But I like the current tabs look in most skins: monobook, monaco, modern, vector – except cologneblue (but that entire skin is ugly, IMO).
- Another change I'd like to propose is making the tab-connected border around the entire thumbnail a bit tighter: currently it takes up too much horizontal space and feels too loose. Changing class 'dw-tabimg' padding to 0.3em (or even 0.2em) and class 'thumb' margin-bottom to the same accomplishes this (but 'thumb' may be used elsewhere so I'm not sure whether there are side effects). --Xymph (talk) 05:19, 25 April 2016 (CDT)
- No follow-up due to not being interested to try this adjustment, or lack of time? If the former, I'm not going to push it any further. So where does that leave the RFC?
- Given that you and I like the template, Gez is not veto-ing it, and Ryan already loved it anyway :), is there a reason to keep the RFC open any longer? Can the template now be deployed on map pages?
- Just trying to avoid the discussion pace on this thing dropping to glacial. ;) --Xymph (talk) 16:25, 29 April 2016 (CDT)
- Another possibility occurred to me: I presume that each skin has its own .css file (so far I saw only Common.css), so if the 'border-radius' property is moved out of class 'dw-tab' into the Monaco skin .css (and perhaps other skin(s) where rounded corners don't look out of place) but not the MonoBook skin; then the corners will remain rectangular in that skin. --Xymph (talk) 17:08, 29 April 2016 (CDT)
- (Unindenting due to run-away depth) Lack of time. Trying to push out some games for Night Dive right now, on top of dodging bad weather. I think deploying the template can proceed; I've not tried your border adjustment idea yet, but that doesn't have to hold up actually using it if it is needed. --Quasar (talk) 01:05, 30 April 2016 (CDT)
Flipping back and forth between the maps sometimes looks disjointed, but that's an issue with the files, not the template: "dotted" maps were created before our omgifol standardization, and the bot doesn't know how to transfer the dots to the rescaled image. That might be a future project, but is expected to require considerable effort.
If there are continued objections over the borders and other style details described above, that's understandable (I still disagree, but I get that you don't want to leave the polishing half-completed, having done all that research and debugging). If not, however, I think we should close this. Ryan W (living fossil) 04:27, 12 July 2017 (CDT)