Doom Wiki:RFC/Maptabs template



Request For Comment
This is a resolved request for comment on a particular article issue or project. Active RFCs are automatically logged at Doom Wiki:RFC and can be found in Category:Active RFCs. This RFC has been marked as resolved since 2017-07-28.

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 have applied your suggestion and I do not personally object to the change. It's a bit less slouchy looking. --Quasar (talk) 22:35, 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)
The "thumb" class is part of MediaWiki's global style sheets and can't be altered there w/o changing the global behavior of images on the site. --Quasar (talk) 06:15, 25 April 2016 (CDT)
Was afraid of that. Then just a minor adjustment of 'dw-tabimg' padding to 0.4em would still reduce the horizontal looseness a bit, while not looking bad on top of that fixed bottom margin. Can you try that? --Xymph (talk) 07:26, 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)
Ok, I started putting it into use. Any feedback before I proceed with E1M1 through E2M5? Also, if you have a spare minute now, those border adjustment and separate .css file suggestions still stand. --Xymph (talk) 16:20, 11 May 2016 (CDT)
Yes; please make sure the images are not reduced in size significantly. The last parameter to the Maptabs template will override the default thumbnail size. No use in having nice map images if we're going to display them as postage stamps on the articles. --Quasar (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2016 (CDT)


A year later (!), Template:Maptabs is deployed more widely.  I can find no complaints from other users (or indeed any reactions).  The bot made a subsequent run to address the thumbnail size issue.

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)

Closed; see above.    Ryan W (living fossil) 04:20, 28 July 2017 (CDT)