Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Bc"
imported>Haama (→Documentation needs to be updated: Good?) |
imported>DragoonWraith (my reasoning) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Is the newline really necessary? It creates a bunch of dead whitespace below the page title above the breadcrumb links which pushes the important page content down the page more than it otherwise would be. Normally breadcrumb links like these are styled so that they appear closely below the page title or other form of navigation without taking up a lot of space. Perhaps the "Back to: " text could even go away? If not, can we at least condense the template to take up only a single line.<br>--[[User:SnakeChomp|SnakeChomp]] 19:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | Is the newline really necessary? It creates a bunch of dead whitespace below the page title above the breadcrumb links which pushes the important page content down the page more than it otherwise would be. Normally breadcrumb links like these are styled so that they appear closely below the page title or other form of navigation without taking up a lot of space. Perhaps the "Back to: " text could even go away? If not, can we at least condense the template to take up only a single line.<br>--[[User:SnakeChomp|SnakeChomp]] 19:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I kind of like having "Back to:" because it makes it ''very'' obvious what those links are for, which I consider a good thing (people didn't understand this on the CSwiki which used Categories for the same thing). The newline is there because I think "Back to: < blah < blah < blah" looks ugly. | |||
:However, I'm just one person and these are just my opinions. If others feel differently on one or both of these, feel free to change this. | |||
:[[User:DragoonWraith|DragoonWraith]] · [[User talk:DragoonWraith|talk]] · 20:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:26, 7 January 2009
Oh man this is useful. Good work.
--Quetzilla 00:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Documentation needs to be updated
Haama, you need to update the documentation here, too. It seems as if you need to repeat entries every time? Also, I think there are some mistakes in the code, but I'm not sure because I'm not certain how it is supposed to work. Update the doc so I can help out.
DragoonWraith · talk · 01:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry about that - had to run shortly after finishing it. I've updated the docs - had to use a few tricks, but it looks nice! I really like the formatting you suggested.
- --Haama 04:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- DW, I never was quite sure what you meant by "repeat entries every time". Did the code look right (now that the notes are there)?
- --Haama 20:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Newline after "back to:" text
Is the newline really necessary? It creates a bunch of dead whitespace below the page title above the breadcrumb links which pushes the important page content down the page more than it otherwise would be. Normally breadcrumb links like these are styled so that they appear closely below the page title or other form of navigation without taking up a lot of space. Perhaps the "Back to: " text could even go away? If not, can we at least condense the template to take up only a single line.
--SnakeChomp 19:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I kind of like having "Back to:" because it makes it very obvious what those links are for, which I consider a good thing (people didn't understand this on the CSwiki which used Categories for the same thing). The newline is there because I think "Back to: < blah < blah < blah" looks ugly.
- However, I'm just one person and these are just my opinions. If others feel differently on one or both of these, feel free to change this.
- DragoonWraith · talk · 20:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)