Talk:Stackable

Page layout
I think I like putting the images right of the text best, makes the text/image relation clearer. Feel free to change that however. --Alfwyn 17:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree. I'm not too sure what size your monitor is, but on my monitor, the third image is far below the text it's supposed to be illustrating, and there's large empty gaps at the top and bottom. Not really what I'd call making the text/image relation clearer. --Belthazar451 21:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Grr, that's another IE/Firefox issue it seems. Looked quite horrible with firefox, I agree. --Alfwyn 22:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I produced a version displaying about the same on firefox/IE here. The problem with the current layout with my IE is, that there is a large gap before the second image (behaves like there is a clear right before the second image). --Alfwyn 22:32, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Maximum?
Is there a maximum number allowed in a stack? That is, what is the largest stack-size of stackable item(s)? I would presume that we'd encounter a maximum DISPLAYABLE number before any ACTUAL-inside-the-database maximum. What is the largest number displayed that anyone has captured in a screen shot? Thanks. -- Franklincain (t/c) 12:05, 10 August 2012 (PDT)


 * Courtesy of a chance encounter with an Ocean Master (on an unrelated matter), I was able to get an answer to this question tonight. After creating a stack of 100,000 RMs, she said the last zero was cut short, only showing its front half.  Therefore, we should be able to see up to five entire digits displayed, for a highest possible maximum displayable of 99,999.  -- Franklincain (t/c) 20:39, 10 August 2012 (PDT)
 * If it's not a monospaced font, one would assume that 111,111 would display properly even when 100,000 does not. Or maybe even 100,001. I'm not clear as to why that's an important consideration, though. That said, since 100,000 is possible, we can tell that the actual upper limit is at least 2^17. Since 17 is a weird binary index, though, it's probably greater than that. --Belthazar451 21:11, 10 August 2012 (PDT)