Template talk:Userboxtop
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] CSS problem with floating
There is a problem with the CSS of the userboxes. If I have some userboxes on my page, they don't stay one under the other, but they have the typical css floating behaviour of staying on the side opposite of the allignement. What I say is that they aligne orizzontally, not vertically. Try it. The solution is to put a clear: attribute in the css of the box. See my User page for more info. - (Posted by User:Giandrea)
[edit] Missing parameter info
The "Usage" section should describe what the parameters can be. I have no idea what the valid alignments are for "align=", for instance... left, right, center, none? What are the defaults if you don't have a parameter, and what are the other defaults if you have a parameter but leave it blank after the equal sign? --Tifego 00:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Problems in XHTML validation (for multiple userboxes)
There's a problem where using multiple userboxes may cause the page to no longer a valid XHTML when validating by the W3C XHTML Validator. The reason is the table's id property "id=userboxes" is being redefined for each additional userboxes, and this is not allowed under XHTML 1.0 Specifications.
Perhaps removing that id property altogether would help?
=== FourBlades 06:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think the id should be made a class instead. In the XHTML spec, an id can only appear once, but a class can appear any number of times. However, making the change would require everyone taking advantage of custom CSS to hide userboxes to update their CSS. --Tim1988 18:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- So the obvious solution is the addition of the class attribute, broadcast an advance notification of the removal of the id attribute (say 3 months notice); removal of the id attribute at the time specified. Cain Mosni 12:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Userbox - Userboxes?
I changed the title at the top of the template from "Userbox" to "Userboxes". The way I see it, most users will be using this to "package" more than one userbox, so the plural is needed.
The last time I made this change, I was inexplicably reverted by User:Brendenhull. I see from his talk page however that this is not the first time he has reverted legitimate edits without explanation, and I see no reason why this shouldn't have a plural. Anyone agree? --Tim1988 18:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. I suppose there could be a way to programmatically have "Userbox" or "Userboxes" depending on how many userboxes there are.
[edit] Userboxbreak
Is there any way to give Userboxbreak the same parameters to set as Userboxtop? There are groups of templates that I would like to differentiate by color, and since using Userboxtop isn't an option, as one box slides right under another in IE (though they look fine in FireFox), Userboxbreak needs to be more customizable. I am still leaning how to make templates by practicing on userboxes, so I may be out of my depth on this one. - LA @ 12:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Top text
After some of the recent changes to this template, having no text at the top (to replace "Userboxes") doesn't seem to work anymore. When I use the parameter toptext= (with nothing after the equal sign), an apostrophe shows up at the top. When I use toptext="", "" shows up, and when I use just toptext, toptext shows up at the top. Can't think of any other ways to do it, and I don't understand the way all the code works, so can anyone help me? Thanks! --Galaxiaad 04:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- I've fixed it. The problem started when the toptext parameter was bolded with wiki markup. When the toptext parameter was blank, the three apostrophes from each side came together, forming
<big>''''''</big>. The apostrophes are interpreted as (correct me if I'm wrong) bold, italics, then one apostrophe of text. I switched the bold and the big tags, so now when toptext is blank, the code reads'''<big></big>'''and renders correctly. You may need to purge the cache or make a null edit before it displays correctly. Pagrashtak 15:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Margins
It's nice that the box allows the user to select alignments, but it was clearly originally designed with right alignment in mind, and the margins are fixed at zero, except for the left, which looks all cock-eyed, when the box is left aligned. Whilst it is on my list of things to do when the case of circular tuits arrives I don't yet know template syntax, but I know what needs to be implemented:
- If the alignment is not "left" there needs to be a style element of "margin-left: 1em"
- If the alignment is not "right" there needs to be a style element of "margin-right: 1em"
That will take care of correct margins for all 3 alignments - left, center, right. Cain Mosni 12:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reminder
Sorry if this sounds like I'm talking down to everyone, but I'd like to remind all editors that this template is widely used. A recent good-faith edit caused numerous problems around various users' pages; when I first noticed it, I thought it was related to a new userbox that I was adding. Then I ran across it on several other editor's pages. When I saw it screw up a page on my userpage that I hadn't modified in a while, I realized where the problem might lie.
Please, if you make any changes (even seemingly innocuous ones, like removing the center tag), use the "What links here" tag and check out a wide sampling of pages to ensure that you didn't accidently break a page. EVula 15:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I think somebody changed something in the template text so that text now wraps on the side of the box, whereas before it stayed beneath it. This is now a problem on my user page, in the section Edit History. Not sure how to fix it now, though… --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- When did you first notice the problem? I just switched the "align" tag to a CSS float declaration, but it didn't change anything on your page (I also tried wrapping the list on your page with a div tag with a left margin, but that didn't help, either). EVula 02:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
