 |
This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes. |
|---|
Development status: Active
Forum status: Closed
Active Development Forum
Can be found: here
Introduction
As many of the more technically apt users are aware the current infobox system is quite massive and very hard to read and maintain. This is primarily due to the fact that all infoboxes rely on the monolithic infobox core that aims to satisfy every single possibility that could arise when making an infobox. This has resulted in cryptic code that no one is able to properly read not modify.
Until now there has been no other way of doing things but with the advent of Portable Infoboxes that has all changed.
What is wrong with the infoboxes now?
At present on desktop these infoboxes function normally and they will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. However, these infoboxes, while they work on desktop, do not work well when viewed on mobile devices.
Why do we care about mobile?
We care because as a content provider we need to take every possible step to make sure that our content is always looking it's best for our users.
And with the increasing demand for mobile sites and mobile content it would do us well to adopt a mobile friendly way of displaying information so that every Nukapedian can get the most out of what we offer.
What will change if we adopt this?
There will be only a handful of aesthetic changes when moving. Keep in mind that this is not a direct infobox translation but is a close match which involves making some compromises. The most notable of these changes is the removal of the supertitles (Fallout 3 character) from the infobox. At present it is simply not possible to include this in the infoboxes. However, the games are still listed with the help of a lua module.
Can we see this infobox?
Certainly, the current character infobox can be viewed here with its source code available here and here.
What happened to the core?
It was removed in favor of independent, need based design. This means that each infobox is self contained and does not rely on another.
Why not use a core?
Because they are bulky, hard to read, monolithic, and unnecessary.
What are the changes we have to make in order for this to work?
Changing F03, F03MZ, etc. to their proper titlesAdding File: to image links
The infobox is ready for use with no changes.
How do you plan to make these changes?
I plan on making these changes slowly by converting one infobox at a time so that we can be assured that each infobox functions and displays as it should for both mobile and desktop users.
Conclusion
In conclusion I feel that this step is a major step forward for both mobile and desktop communities.
Please leave all questions and comments below. And please be sure to follow the commenting guidelines below.
Shining-Armor (talk) 02:53, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
Demo
Commenting Guidelines
When commenting I ask that you follow my indentation scheme and use level 3 headings when creating new points.
- === small description ===
All replies need to be separated from the one above it with a newline.
I also ask that you separate all new lines with a line break.
In addition your signature needs to be on its own line and at the same indentation level as your post.
Discussion
Uncertain about the significance of the changes
I am afraid I don't understand the deeper changes to the template, but from what I do understand this would allow us to better serve our mobile userbase at the cost of only our supertitles.
I am not certain if it's worth it, but I'm also not certain it would be detrimental.
--The Ever Ruler (talk) 03:07, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
- The changes go all the way down to the core. Instead of having a mess of code you have a few lines of clean, easy to read code that will serve Nukapedia well into the future. You can see for yourself by comparing Template:Infobox and Portable character template.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 03:11, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
- Most of our templates date back to Porter when Wikicode was less functional than it is. For the most part, we're acting like the Brotherhood of Steel when it comes to it - We don't fully understand it, we can't create it, we struggle to fix major problems with it, we've just figured out how to use it and do minor changes (I managed to reverse engineer enough to make somewhat functional portals for example).
- I'd like to see something of a major overhaul with templates in general, With LUA, I understand there's more that we can do with them now.
- Lua is not the fix-all that you may think it is. It is merely a tool that is used for intelligent generation and the likes. It is used in combination with wikitext and templates to add more functionality.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 03:23, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
- Other than some minor compromises there won't be much of a change in the infoboxes.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 16:54, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
- Look at the two infoboxes and compare them, you can see the exact changes.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 22:47, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
(←)
The Gunny
23:04, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
- Also, I believe that Energy may be asking about changes to the infobox template usage, ie will we have to make parameter changes, or changes to the images on the pages. I may be wrong though. Additionally, my comments now seriously rock way more than anyone else's.
The Gunny
23:11, August 8, 2015 (UTC)
- The imagesize function is built into the new infobox code so that images can dynamically adapt to their viewing environment.
- As for the parameter changes, yes, there will be one.cThis change will be switching FO3, FONV, etc. to their proper page names so that the infobox can correctly link them.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 02:48, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
Style
All the block sections need to be the same width, it looks better. 
BOLTMAN FOREVER 02:38, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- There isn't much to be done in that regard, headings are just naturally 2px wider than content sections and that's just something that can't be helped.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 02:48, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
There is a very bothersome incongruence with the new infobox. Specifically, the white borders are uneven in thickness. And in general, I think these borders are too thick. I also don't like the "Games" box at the top -- it does not fit in with the other information sections as it does in the current infobox. Overall, IMO, the aesthetics of the new infobox do not help us in terms of visual professionalism and general cleanliness. --Skire (talk) 03:35, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- Then would you like to suggest some CSS that would make them look better? Also, where do you feel that the games box should go?
- Shining-Armor (talk) 03:42, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- I cannot begin to understand how to make them better. That is simply not my area of expertise. What I do know is that the current infobox is a lot more pleasing to the eye (again, in my opinion). The "Games" box should stay where it is now -- not causing any problems at the top of the "Gameplay" section. More importantly, it should still have the "appearances" sub-header thing at the left. --Skire (talk) 03:45, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- I think I corrected everything you mentioned, try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
- If I understood you correctly you wanted the appearances to appear where they do in the current infobox instead of at the top?
- Shining-Armor (talk) 04:10, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
The space between two words, like the "Human" and beneath it "Cyborg" is too small. Makes the text a bit more difficult to read; it feels like one compressed box. ☢ Energy X ☣ 09:23, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- It is meant to conserve as much space as possible so that as infoboxes get longer and longer they don't take up as much space.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 20:13, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- I actually like them condensed in the "upgraded" version, doesn't hurt legibility and reduces space considerably.
- --The Ever Ruler (talk) 20:45, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
Conclusion
I will be bringing this to a vote as it seems as though everything that can be fixed has been.
Shining-Armor (talk) 23:22, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- Not so fast. You just made a simple infobox. You should create an example using all parameters and then see how it looks. And I share the concerns Skire brings up, think the font is worse with the new infobox, borders are slightly worse, distance between lines has become smaller. Our current one is still better. I expect a whole lot of trouble when going with such a major change. It's too soon for a vote. Think the people won't exactly know what they're voting for at the moment. Also, it doesn't support other images, like the footer, and probably neither location maps for location infoboxes. Jspoel 23:32, August 9, 2015 (UTC)
- If you had bothered to read my plan above I said that I am doing the conversions one infobox at a time and I have started with the character infobox.
- Each new infobox has its own code base which, as you'd know if you read my post, allows each individual infobox to be tailored to its individual need. So far the example above is the complete character infobox and feaures everything said infobox needs.
- I am sorry that you feel that the borders are worse (when in fact they are the exact same as the ones in the present infobox). As for the line-height this was done on purpose to make the infobox appear to be more compact so that longer infoboxes do not take up as much room as they currently do. As for the font, I find it to be easier to read, especially since the infobox is now more compact.
- As for trouble, you do not know the half of it, as far as I am aware you were not the one who had to go through and not only replicate function but also try to mimic style. You have no idea how much trouble it was to get to this point so do not even start.
- As for a vote, I think people know what they are voting for.
- Shining-Armor (talk) 23:50, August 9, 2015 (UTC)