Talk:List of Air Ministry Specifications

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] List

I took the liberty of arranging the list by year and by spec number within each year. The alternating light gray/dark gray lines are nice but PITA to move around with each addition so IMHO they'd be best left out until we complete the list. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 22:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Organisation of list

To keep edits manageable is it time to split the list into the various categories F for Fighter, B for bomber, E for experimental etc?GraemeLeggett 20:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

To be honest I think the merged list gives a better picture of the progression going on in designs - you can see that the Blenheim and Spitfire were requested/approved in the same year, for example. Separating it out loses some of that perspective, and it's not like we're editing it a lot lately. ericg ✈ 23:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Valid point, would an (artificial) break at years be effective? My concern is that long table is less "interesting" a break into sections would also mean that links foorm articles could get to within a few lines of the specific entry rather than the top of the page ; the e "List of....#1944" coding. GraemeLeggett 09:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Year could work, or perhaps decade. ericg ✈ 14:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I've tried it by decade, but I'd like to know how to keep the table column widths consistent. GraemeLeggett 14:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)