Template talk:trans-see

Extra clicking
I've lived with this for a little while now, but I don't see the point of a show/hide bar for this. It just requires an extra click from the user. When combined with it seems particularly pointless to have the extra click. It is fine that we have a template to allow for uniformity of presentation and to accommodate change in presentation, but the show/hide feature seems (mildly) pernicious. DCDuring TALK 19:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, one of the things I mean to do someday if no one else gets to it is have this box display nicely with the show/hide boxes, but just display the "see" reference on the line. Note the present implementation is very simple. If someone else wants to, have at it! Robert Ullmann 19:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * So the idea would be to have the bar and the link appearing where the gloss appears now and no distracting "show"? Couldn't that be ripped off from ? DCDuring TALK 19:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Never mind. I can see it is more complicated than that. It might need a new class. Beyond my paygrade. DCDuring TALK 20:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I've revealed the content. The NavFrame, NavHead, NavContent classes aren't general enough to display this in the best way – someone will have to clean all this up for a better appearance. But it's now better than playing guessing games. —Michael Z. 2009-03-07 17:09 z 


 * I've reverted your changes. The new version did not justify text, balance properly, or use the same color scheme as other trans templates, so it looked terrible compared next to those templates. --EncycloPetey 18:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but it showed the reader a link, instead of stupidly hiding it. You really think it's better if it looks pretty but doesn't work?


 * In either case the classes and structure for these templates remain broken. —Michael Z. 2009-03-14 19:36 z 

(de-indenting, since I don't know who I'm replying to): the JavaScript for NavFrames applies to elements whose sole class is "NavFrame", whereas (as you can guess) the CSS applies to elements any of whose classes is "NavFrame". So if we want the normal styling of NavFrames — and I agree with EncycloPetey that we do — and we don't want the whole "show/hide" stuff — and I agree with DCDuring, Robert Ullmann, and Mzajac that we don't — then we can just do this: &#xA; — see   , which generates this: foo — see bar. And if we're really picky about formatting, we can even wrap the em dash and "see" in some sort of : foo — see bar. What do y'all think? —Ruakh TALK 21:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

P.S. If we do take the approach that I suggested, then we should also place a comment at MediaWiki:Monobook.js to make sure no one ever smartens that code in a way that breaks this. :-P  —Ruakh TALK 21:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good: I say go ahead and implement it. Thanks. —Michael Z. 2009-03-15 21:08 z 


 * Done, thanks. :-)  —Ruakh TALK 02:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That's what I'm talking about. DCDuring TALK 03:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me too. --EncycloPetey 02:06, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Template talk:trans-top
^ Relevant proposal. --Yair rand (talk) 15:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Tea room discussion

 * Grease_pit/2017/April --Barytonesis (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Section links aren't working anymore
For some reason, this template stopped linking to the correct section of an article after you rewrote it. Can you restore the original version of the template so that it will work correctly again? Jarble (talk) 15:16, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * What do you mean, what is the correct section? —CodeCat 15:50, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The template used to link to a specific section of each article. Since you edited the template, it omits the section anchor and links to the top of the page instead. Jarble (talk) 18:17, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Which section did it link to? —CodeCat 18:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It depends on the parameters of the template. For example, used to link to dog. Can you restore the last working revision of this template so that it will work correctly again? Jarble (talk) 21:08, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You need to use senseids for that now, as explained in the documentation. Both translation tables need to be given an  parameter with the same value to link them. This is better than using the glosses, because someone could change the gloss anytime. —CodeCat 21:28, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If you want me to restore the old behaviour as well, you'll have to get an admin to unlock the page so that I can edit it. But it should be considered deprecated and  should be used instead. —CodeCat 21:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

There's still an error in this template that needs to be fixed. Can you unprotect this template so that we can edit it again? Jarble (talk) 23:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Obviously it's not an error, just functionality that has been changed. Why won't you use the  parameter? —CodeCat 23:40, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It would require a huge amount of manual effort to replace the missing section links in all of these templates, which are used in thousands of articles. Can we just restore this missing feature instead of manually editing every template? Jarble (talk) 17:38, 24 July 2017 (UTC)