User talk:Sagacious/Shoppe Room Tables
I know you're just getting started on this, but I have a couple of suggestions. 1) Eliminate a lot of the whitespace, perhaps by putting the paint information underneath the image. 2) Once you've eliminated the whitespace, take a look at using multiple columns like we do on the sword and mug page. Thanks! --Barrister 12:42, 12 July 2006 (PDT)
- Ok and ok! Good suggestions. I started it then RL started bugging me and I've only just come back. Working on it ;-) --Sagacious (talk) 15:24, 12 July 2006 (PDT)
- I'm baaaaaack. Another suggestion: Change "thumb" to just "180px". The thumbnail caption is redundant since you have the names above the images. --Barrister 16:00, 12 July 2006 (PDT)
Pressing butan for feedback: Ooh! Pwetty! The whole thing could do with s border though if possible. I'm below able in Wiki tables. --Angelbeaver (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
- Hmm - I'm against a solid border around the whole thing. Mainly because it's not needed, mainly because it means more code :P --Sagacious (talk) 18:47, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
- Don't know about the code bit but it helps make the whole thing seem much more... contained --Angelbeaver (talk) 18:50, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
- Similar non-bordered tables are used on the housing pages, Manor is an example. --Sagacious (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
- I feel they should have a border too but they aren't as needy as the images have black surroundings and act as a border, here the Black-> Light Grey -> White just doesn't seem right. --Angelbeaver (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
- I agree - a thin border would look good. --Featherfin 09:13, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- I feel they should have a border too but they aren't as needy as the images have black surroundings and act as a border, here the Black-> Light Grey -> White just doesn't seem right. --Angelbeaver (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
- Similar non-bordered tables are used on the housing pages, Manor is an example. --Sagacious (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
- Don't know about the code bit but it helps make the whole thing seem much more... contained --Angelbeaver (talk) 18:50, 19 July 2006 (PDT)
180 degrees
Since the layout of this table is different, I'd suggest taking a poke a doing it in standard YPPedia style, if you haven't already. You only need the one black cell, and the information is already distinct from that cell, so there's not much justification for having it also be distinct from the rest of the site's style. Although you're close to the project and have just come off of the housing table project, I think most visitors will not expect the house and shoppe tables to look similar to each other. As an added benefit, you'll regain borders between the information cells on the right. If the eventual plan is to go to a 4-column layout, you might have to revisit the decision, but it doesn't look like you'll have the horizontal space for that right now. --AtteSmythe 09:14, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- Um, so to sum up - your suggestion is? --Sagacious (talk) 09:17, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- Eh, I guess I have time for some markup. See the first row. I took the H3 out so that you don't have to kill the edit sections, took some redundant CSS out of the row specifiers, and changed the style to use class="toccolours", as per Template:Infobox flag. Left the others for comparison. It's all in one edit, so just roll it back if the changes are too many. --AtteSmythe 09:37, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- I tried to convert to the new formatting idea, but the first box looks like it has a grey tint, which the others don't. I had to force their white background because otherwise using the same code as is used for the first box just made the other boxes have a black background :-/ --Sagacious (talk) 10:10, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- You had leftover style on the row specifiers, which was inherited by the cells. Try this...--AtteSmythe 10:33, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- I tried to convert to the new formatting idea, but the first box looks like it has a grey tint, which the others don't. I had to force their white background because otherwise using the same code as is used for the first box just made the other boxes have a black background :-/ --Sagacious (talk) 10:10, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- Eh, I guess I have time for some markup. See the first row. I took the H3 out so that you don't have to kill the edit sections, took some redundant CSS out of the row specifiers, and changed the style to use class="toccolours", as per Template:Infobox flag. Left the others for comparison. It's all in one edit, so just roll it back if the changes are too many. --AtteSmythe 09:37, 20 July 2006 (PDT)
- Yersh - I need yer opinions on this example folks :-) --Sagacious (talk) 13:42, 21 July 2006 (PDT)
- Ah see, this I like. Less huge black boxes. --Featherfin 14:03, 21 July 2006 (PDT)
- Definitely getting better. I'm not fond of seeing the word "Info" repeated as a heading. It lacks a reason to be there. --Barrister 14:39, 21 July 2006 (PDT)
- Ah see, this I like. Less huge black boxes. --Featherfin 14:03, 21 July 2006 (PDT)
- Ok the template is made. Are the suggested renames for the images ok? --Sagacious (talk) 15:26, 21 July 2006 (PDT)
- I'm okay with the image name changes. But I have concerns about the second column. "props= no" defaults to "This area has no props." I'd rather see it default to not having the "Props" heading at all. My concern is that a room with an unknown list of props would never be completed because everyone would think the list is already gathered. Perhaps a third value "props= unknown" would be helpful? I have a similar concern for the special items fields. --Barrister 02:37, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
- That should be easy enough to do. For special items, it just means making it into a sub-template. --Sagacious (talk) 08:07, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
- Done! Ready for more feedback :) --Sagacious (talk) 08:31, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
- Looks pretty good to me. Let's see if atteSmythe has more feedback. --Barrister 08:40, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
- I had some things with which to play, but nothing that would change the substance of the template - it'd all be style work in the template, so nothing there that should prevent deployment. All in all, I think it looks pretty darned good. --AtteSmythe 13:46, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
- Approve++ --Yaten talk 08:46, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
- Looks pretty good to me. Let's see if atteSmythe has more feedback. --Barrister 08:40, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
- I'm okay with the image name changes. But I have concerns about the second column. "props= no" defaults to "This area has no props." I'd rather see it default to not having the "Props" heading at all. My concern is that a room with an unknown list of props would never be completed because everyone would think the list is already gathered. Perhaps a third value "props= unknown" would be helpful? I have a similar concern for the special items fields. --Barrister 02:37, 22 July 2006 (PDT)
