Template talk:Sandbox: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (New page: I really like this, btw. :--~~~~) |
(nice, but...) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== [[Template:Status box]] re-working starting on [http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=Template:Sandbox&oldid=46625 2007-06-01] == |
|||
I really like this, btw. |
|||
I really like this, btw. --[[User:Lauren|Lauren]] 11:30, 3 July 2007 (EDT) |
|||
: Thanks! It was not easy (I'm learning about the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ParserFunctions Parser Functions]—quite tricky as all the [http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=Template:Sandbox&action=history ''tweaking'' saves] proves ;) I concentrated myself on getting it to work, with caring for (structural) cosmetics (ie: table layout and whitespaces) but not other cosmetics. |
|||
: My doubts about the usability of this template are two-fold: |
|||
:* people actually using it — since most parameters are optional, many users will probably not bother checking for the ''available'' fields to fill in (ie: l10n). |
|||
:* maintenance and evolution — the source code '''IS''' tricky, and a simple enter in the wrong place can create some havoc in the layout :( |
|||
: The other bleeding edge in this template is the dynamic categorization... I like it, but should be tested further and decided upon. Again thanks, and if you (or anybody else) has ideas, comments, suggestions, the merrier I'll be! --[[User:Xavi|Xavi]] 12:01, 3 July 2007 (EDT) |
|||
Revision as of 16:01, 3 July 2007
Template:Status box re-working starting on 2007-06-01
I really like this, btw. --Lauren 11:30, 3 July 2007 (EDT)
- Thanks! It was not easy (I'm learning about the Parser Functions—quite tricky as all the tweaking saves proves ;) I concentrated myself on getting it to work, with caring for (structural) cosmetics (ie: table layout and whitespaces) but not other cosmetics.
- My doubts about the usability of this template are two-fold:
- people actually using it — since most parameters are optional, many users will probably not bother checking for the available fields to fill in (ie: l10n).
- maintenance and evolution — the source code IS tricky, and a simple enter in the wrong place can create some havoc in the layout :(
- The other bleeding edge in this template is the dynamic categorization... I like it, but should be tested further and decided upon. Again thanks, and if you (or anybody else) has ideas, comments, suggestions, the merrier I'll be! --Xavi 12:01, 3 July 2007 (EDT)