Difference between revisions of "User talk:Al hubbard"
From EVE University Wiki
Al hubbard (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:I probably should have said "header". [http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/index.php?title=Mid_slot&oldid=86882 Previously], every item had a separate header, and then one line describing the item. I thought this made the page feel cluttered and made it difficult to distinguish one section from another. It also made the table of contents huge and unwieldy. Headers are usually for paragraphs of text, or totally separate things like on the [[lexicon]], and when they have a single like beneath them they just take up too much screen space. I'm not totally married with the format I changed it to, and I'd love to improve it further, but I think it does a better job than the headers did. --[[User:Al hubbard|Al hubbard]] ([[User talk:Al hubbard|talk]]) 12:16, 8 December 2016 (CST) | :I probably should have said "header". [http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/index.php?title=Mid_slot&oldid=86882 Previously], every item had a separate header, and then one line describing the item. I thought this made the page feel cluttered and made it difficult to distinguish one section from another. It also made the table of contents huge and unwieldy. Headers are usually for paragraphs of text, or totally separate things like on the [[lexicon]], and when they have a single like beneath them they just take up too much screen space. I'm not totally married with the format I changed it to, and I'd love to improve it further, but I think it does a better job than the headers did. --[[User:Al hubbard|Al hubbard]] ([[User talk:Al hubbard|talk]]) 12:16, 8 December 2016 (CST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::OK, that makes sense. I agree that your design is less cluttered, and until (if we should ever decide to do so) we expand the description beyond one line of text I think we should definitely keep it. The only downside to omitting headers is that we can no longer link directly to a module group, but at the moment there isn't much need for it. | ||
| + | ::For uncluttering the TOC, there is a MediaWiki template to limit the "depth" of headers that show up in the TOC, but after some brief fiddling I was unable to get it to work on our wiki. – [[User:Noemie_belacqua|Noemie]] [[User_talk:Noemie_belacqua|Belacqua]] 02:56, 9 December 2016 (CST) | ||
Revision as of 08:56, 9 December 2016
Mid and low slot pages
Hi! Thank you for tackling the low and mid slot pages. :) I was just wondering: what did you mean by "reduce dependency on headings"? Why did you want to use fewer headings? – Noemie Belacqua 02:55, 8 December 2016 (CST)
- I probably should have said "header". Previously, every item had a separate header, and then one line describing the item. I thought this made the page feel cluttered and made it difficult to distinguish one section from another. It also made the table of contents huge and unwieldy. Headers are usually for paragraphs of text, or totally separate things like on the lexicon, and when they have a single like beneath them they just take up too much screen space. I'm not totally married with the format I changed it to, and I'd love to improve it further, but I think it does a better job than the headers did. --Al hubbard (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2016 (CST)
- OK, that makes sense. I agree that your design is less cluttered, and until (if we should ever decide to do so) we expand the description beyond one line of text I think we should definitely keep it. The only downside to omitting headers is that we can no longer link directly to a module group, but at the moment there isn't much need for it.
- For uncluttering the TOC, there is a MediaWiki template to limit the "depth" of headers that show up in the TOC, but after some brief fiddling I was unable to get it to work on our wiki. – Noemie Belacqua 02:56, 9 December 2016 (CST)
