Template talk:ToC2005Atlantichurricaneseason
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. |
| Template | This article has been rated as Template-Class on the assessment scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Todo?
Before Cuivienen copied the ToC from my sandbox, these todo entries were still on my list, which might guide improvements.
- make code more like {{Saffir-Simpson small}}
- templatize buttons? ({{Hurrcat button}} with {{switch}} statement?)
- shift links from buttons to names
make links only to within 2005AHS(done by Titoxd)
--AySz88^-^ 06:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] ToC versus "button bar"
This ToC is much better than the {{2005 Atlantic hurricane season buttons}} and should replace it. Jdorje 02:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think we'll probably run into concerns about its size.... But I agree that it's better. :p
- We might want to combine the list of sections and the real subpages ("statistics", "records") into the same place as the TOC though. --AySz88^-^ 03:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vertical Length
I've tried to change this template to a 3x10 format from 6x5 to reduce the vertical height and thus the whitespace around it on the 2005 season page, but for some reason those changes cause one of the columns to become compressed. However, if someone else could make this 3x10 it would be an improvement. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 21:23, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed. All the values for that column were one character, so there wasn't any need for the column to be wider, which caused it to be rendered like it was. I just added blank spaces to fix it. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 22:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comment
I found this table confusing at first... Can I suggest the storm names are listed in chronological order left to right with breaks after TD10 and Hurricane Stan rather than the current, vertically organised layout as, in my opinion, that would make it easier to interpret. - JVG 11:51, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I was rthinking exactly the same thing... so much so, I'm going to do it. Tompw 00:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe I was just used to the old style, but I can't make sense of it any more. I think the old style was better because chronological storms were not separated by colored blocks. Now it is very hard to follow the chronological order because colored blocks get in the way. —Cuiviénen, Saturday, 25 March 2006 @ 03:18 (UTC)
- By old style, I assume mean in columns? I also beg to differ... I don't think anyone reads it in the sense of going "Tropical Storm Arlene, Tropical Storm Bret" etc. to themselves. This template is a navigational aid, and as such, I really feel that arraneging it rows is more intuitive than in columns. Also, the only reason it was in columns is because the way the table was coded made columns easier than rows. (Have a look and you'll see what I mean). Tompw 12:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, it's easier to code it in rows than in columns; doing it in columns while maintaining things in order in Edit view requires nesting tables. I originally had it in columns intentionally.
- I don't see how putting it in rows instead of columns makes navigation easier.... In this format (box name||box name||box name), my eye goes down columns better than across rows, so I'd expect things to go down columns first.... Of course, I'm used to the old style too. --AySz88^-^ 21:42, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- By old style, I assume mean in columns? I also beg to differ... I don't think anyone reads it in the sense of going "Tropical Storm Arlene, Tropical Storm Bret" etc. to themselves. This template is a navigational aid, and as such, I really feel that arraneging it rows is more intuitive than in columns. Also, the only reason it was in columns is because the way the table was coded made columns easier than rows. (Have a look and you'll see what I mean). Tompw 12:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe I was just used to the old style, but I can't make sense of it any more. I think the old style was better because chronological storms were not separated by colored blocks. Now it is very hard to follow the chronological order because colored blocks get in the way. —Cuiviénen, Saturday, 25 March 2006 @ 03:18 (UTC)
[edit] ToC?
Why were the internal links removed from this page? It's a ToC! The template at the bottom of the page is meant to link to the pages. Could someone revert this soon, please?!
