Template talk:Coin image box 2 singles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This template is part of the WikiProject Numismatics, which is an attempt to facilitate the categorization and creation of accurate and formal Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join and see a list of open tasks to help with.
NA	This page is not an article and does not require a rating.

[edit] Initial discussion on design

Here is what User:Curtius posted on the talk page. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 14:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

OK then, here is my prototype for the left side and right side versions (I know they are just tables, but first the design, then I'll figure out templates.). I have tried to stick as close as possible to the standard image layout. There are two versions because they are padded differently.

   * Is this what we want? 
   * Should the O: and R: links be part of it or should I make it more general? 
   * Do I need to make a middle version or will we insist on left & right?

The remaining text is just a filler to show how they look surrounded by text. Curtius 22:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.


O: Head of Mars with Corinthian helmet left	R: Horse head right, grain ear behind
The first Roman silver coin, 281 BC; Crawford 13/1


	O: Diademed head Hercules right, club on shoulder	R: Wolf suckling twins, ROMANO in. ex.
	The first silver coin minted at Rome, 269 BC; Crawford 20/1

Here is what I have --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 14:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Remember, 1024 x 768 is still the mainstream of display resolution. [1].

1 peseta 1998

King Juan Carlos I	COA

500 Japanese yen 2000

Paulownia, state title, value	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image



King Juan Carlos I	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image

Roman Republican As

Paulownia, state title, value	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image
This one has both a caption and a title, the other does not. Editors can decide what function(s) their articles need.

Differences discussion and version 3: Curtius 03:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I think image size should be a template variable (applying to both halves of the image), just like the general thumbnail has variable size. Let the individual editors decide what works on their page.

I think we should try to match the standard image template; hence I support the cell padding. In this version the presence of two pictures and links is clear. I think a padding of 4 is not too much space to sacrifice for that. Also, if there were two single white images I think the padding would avoid the dividing line touching the edge of the coin which can be very close indeed at 100 pixel image size. Disadvantage: the image pair templates will be 8px different in size unless odd image sizes are used.

There are two very different purposes to "Global" text: descriptive caption and/or title. In this version the code makes both an option.

I used 85% for the caption (matches the normal image display), 70% for Obverse/reverse. You used 90% for the caption. Smaller fits better, but may be getting hard to read? I say lets match the standard image display size (85%) everywhere.

For some reason the Yen image had text both left & right justified. I changed it

Comments and version 4. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 12:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the image width should be a template variable. However, optional. Sometimes the images are "small enough", like the Spanish peseta, where blowing it up with a larger width will actually make the image uglier.

Let's define our terminology and template here.

	{{Coin image box 1 double}}	{{Coin image box 2 singles}}
For	Roman Republican As, 500 yen	1 peseta
header	optional	optional
image	required
image_left		required
image_right		required
caption	optional
caption_left		optional
caption_right		optional

Padding demo

From top, and clock wise: 0, 10, 20, 40 px	COA

If the header, or the caption are not present, the template will not generate a empty row at all. As with the padding, you can see from the box on the right, it can be set arbitrarily, on all 4 sides. But I'm not sure I understand you completely on what you want to do with the padding. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 12:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Reference image 300 pixels

Roman Republican As

Paulownia, state title, value	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image
The proposed "1 double" at 300 px is the same width as a single image at 300.

Option 1

King Juan Carlos I	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image
This is the proposed "2 singles". I like the cleanly separated look and the clear recognition that there are two images here. It does line up nicely with the 150 below below but is 8 pixels wider than the 300 above. If one wants to line up with the above 150 needs to be changed to 146 for each image. Not intuitive.

Reference image 150 pixels

Option 2

King Juan Carlos I	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image
This lines up well with width of double, not with width of single. I don't like the visible line between images - it looks like a mistake. I don't like to remove it either because then the two images look like one which is confusing.

Option 3

King Juan Carlos I	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image
This is the same as option 1, except it is all a closed box. I changed the padding on the caption text slightly too. I don't like the boxy look as much. Taste I guess. One problem is that if you have several boxes one after another on the side it gets confusing seeing line after line (see relationship with next one). Another problem is that when you remove the text or the caption you get double-width lines at the top and the bottom - as in the next one.



King Juan Carlos I	Value, bamboo, Mandarin orange, year of minting, latent image

Curtius 00:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

There are a few things I'd like to address

Header I personally like your option 3, with the header boxed inside. This way, readers clearly knows where it belongs to.
Empty header or caption This is not a problem. With optional parameters to a template, the entire row (that would be empty) won't render.
The line below the image and above the caption I see that you chose a color that is the same as the the background, making an illusion of no border. However, the border is visible on the 1-double. Do you have a preference?
Margin The most important topic. Are you concern that when editors include a whole bunch of images, mixture of some 1-double and 2-singles, they would like to make sure the alignment is consistent? One solution is to have 8-8 margin on the 1-double. And 4-4-4-4 on the 2-single. So the sum would be the same.
Background Some images have embedded white background, some black, some transparent. I propose to have the template to use black as default, with option to override. As a result, the margin would seem integrated with the image. But then this will result in the "center border next to images" you point out in option 2. In fact, if the margin is 0, like my original proposal, then all these problem will go away.

--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 14:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Background I don't understand. In the original peseta image you posted there is also a line down the middle. I don't see how to make it go away in both of the "2 single" cases (ie. white/black backgrounds). You know much more about what can be done with tables, etc than I do. If you know how to make this line (border, not margin) vanish in both cases, I agree we do not need a margin down the middle. I like the idea of having user-selectable backgrounds.
The line below the image and above the caption. I did it differently because I wanted to highlight the fact that there were 1 and 2 images. This objective competes against the others. We can drop it.
Margin I would like to have consistent alignment with "one double" and "2 singles". I would also like to have a margin, background, line width and shading, etc as close as possible to the normal thumbnail display for consistent appearance. This could then be around the outside of both two singles and 1 double. Can the margin be an option?
Empty Header Uniform line width around the outside of both the header and the caption seems visually important. If you can get around it some other way, I am happy.
Header. Yeah, I understand. Can this be an option for the header and caption (top & bottom boxes) or is that too awkward?

Curtius

1 peseta 1998

Caption left	Caption right
Footer

I can make the middle border disappear, if that's what you want. The only down side is that the user has to provide the background color of the image to make the middle border "invisible".

Now I understand why you want the margin in the first place (ah ha!). The reason is to make it look like the regular thumbnail structure. However, you have raised 3 requirement:

Looks like regular thumbnail
Shows 2 images when there are actually 2 (via margin)
When editors include a mixture of 1-double or 2-single structures, the width of the 2-single would be exactly 1/2 of the width of the 1-double, and their total widths would be identical

These 3 requirements are mathematically imcompatible. You can only choose 2 of the 3.

I'm not sure I understand your last point. Are you suggesting to add a "footer" row below the 2 image captions, like your option 3? That can be optional too.

--ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 02:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

1) I agree with your analysis. I would like to keep the following two:

Looks like a regular thumbnail
When editors include a mixture of 1-double or 2-single structures, the width of the 2-single would be exactly 1/2 of the width of the 1-double, and their total widths would be identical, both to each other and to a thumbnail of the same width as the 1-double.

I do not mind the user having to specify the centre margin colour. Can we do something like the following?

Header



Caption left	Caption right
Footer





Caption left	Caption right

I agree with your analysis. I will abandon the use of a margin to show that there are two images. Now it is at least mathematically possible!

I think we need two different formats (via options). Here is the rationale for this:

On a purely numismatic page about a coin, editors might include a mixture of 1-double and 2-single structures. This is the "numismatist's" usage; the coin is the topic and the margin-free design is nice because it minimizes space. In addition, it evokes a coin "index card". Examples are Roman As, coins of the euro zone. In such a case, the only constraint is
1. When the width of the 2-single images is exactly 1/2 of the width of the 1-double image their total widths should be identical.
On a non-numismatic page, editors might have a number of thumbnails having nothing to do with coins and also wish to include some 1-double or 2-single structures. Here the coins themselves are not the topic, only the images that they happen to display. An example: a page about the history of Metapontum might include a picture of a coin to illustrate some non-numismatic point about the founder of Metapontum who appears on some of the coins of this city. In such a case, the constraints are
1. When the width of the 2-single image is exactly 1/2 of the width of the general thumbnail image, the total widths should be identical.
2. When the width of the 1-double image is equal to the width of the general thumbnail image, the total widths should be identical.

The objective is to make numismatics more relevant. The idea is to make it easy for non-numismatists to include numismatic images which match the format of other images on their non-numismatic pages. This should result in increased linking and traffic to numismatic pages. This is particularly important to me because in the field of ancient numismatics there is a lot of historical information on the coins.

Can we do something like the following? I have an example of both usages shown. The differences are changing all occurrences of 4px in the case on the left to 0px in the case on the right

header



caption_left	caption_right
footer





caption_left	caption_right
footer

I suggest an extended argument list

	{{Coin image box 1 double}}	{{Coin image box 2 singles}}	default
header	optional	optional	Row/Border disappears if missing
image	required	N/A	required
image_left	N/A	required	required
caption_left	optional	optional	Row/Border disappears if both missing
image_right	N/A	required	required
caption_right	optional	optional	Row/Border disappears if both missing
footer	optional	optional	Row/Border disappears if missing
location	optional	optional	"left"
image_background	optional	optional	#000000
image_margin	optional	optional	4px

Changes:

image/caption order: not sure if this is better or not, but worth thinking about.
default margin: I think this should be 4px because 0 is obvious when you want to change it, 4 is not (at least to me. maybe I am missing some more knowledge).
caption/footer margins: small, but separated from vertical lines
size: Should size be added to the argument list, or should it be done for each of the images ... that will require typing it twice for the double.
location: should locations of "left", "right", "center", "none" all be allowed?

Curtius 17:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I took the liberty of removing repeated stuff from your last edit. I started {{Coin image box 2 singles}}. Will add more examples later. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks very good on the example you provided. However, I added one with larger images and am unsure of the correct syntax to get it to fit properly. I did look at the code but could not understand. Specifically:

Should the image be listed as
- | image_left = Image:Crawford 13-1 Obverse.jpg|88px
- | image_left =
- | image_left = Image:Crawford 13-1 Obverse.jpg
Should the width_left and width_right be stated as a number, as a number of px or ?
Is it necessary to have both a "width_left" and a "width_right"?
the margin for the right position does not seem correct

I am probably pointing out things you already know.... Curtius 01:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I have addressed the issue you raised. But I also found another bug: lengthy header or footer text can enlarge the table width. I will fix that later. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 16:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It is looking really good. I see the bug too. I have changed the text in the last example slightly because I had trouble understanding at first. It occurred to me that this example would be clearer if the background was set to black (the opposite of what one would actually do) ... and then I realized that we have forgotten about the background argument!

Curtius 19:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Just noticed something esle. "Extreme Margin" in the header is left justified while the title for the peseta image is centered. I do no understand why....

Curtius 04:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Really? I checked with both Firefox and IE, they both seem to be center. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/i/Template_talk%7ECoin_image_box_2_singles_0dd9.html"

Category: Non-article numismatic pages

Template talk:Coin image box 2 singles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Initial discussion on design

Views

Navigation

Search