Difference between revisions of "Talk:Orz communications"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Fyzixfighter (talk | contribs) (table vx. definition list) |
(reply) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
; Term 2 : Definition 2 | ; Term 2 : Definition 2 | ||
and so on. The table is a step above what was here, but my main worry with the table is that there are a lot of lines drawing my eyes every which way, and the left justification against that edge in the meanings columns is kind of distracting while trying to read it. I don't know either though if the definition list will be any better, so any thoughts? --[[User:Fyzixfighter|Fyzixfighter]] 05:58, 16 October 2007 (CEST) | and so on. The table is a step above what was here, but my main worry with the table is that there are a lot of lines drawing my eyes every which way, and the left justification against that edge in the meanings columns is kind of distracting while trying to read it. I don't know either though if the definition list will be any better, so any thoughts? --[[User:Fyzixfighter|Fyzixfighter]] 05:58, 16 October 2007 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Indeed. It looks like I've fallen in the evil trap of armchair wiki editing, and forgot to test the readability of the result. At first sight, it would have seemed that by having the words in one column and the definitions in another you can browse through the words easier, without your gaze being caught by the definitions. But now I see that wiki definitions allow you to browse easily through the words ''and'' through the definition (without bumping into an endless wall of text). Well, now, knowing that I did not know about wiki definitions before, I think I'm pretty excusable. :-) [[User:Valaggar|Valaggar]] 14:45, 16 October 2007 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 12:45, 16 October 2007
I'm wondering if the table format, while helpful in organizing this, isn't the best way. Wiki does support definition lists like:
- Term 1
- Definition 1
- Term 2
- Definition 2
and so on. The table is a step above what was here, but my main worry with the table is that there are a lot of lines drawing my eyes every which way, and the left justification against that edge in the meanings columns is kind of distracting while trying to read it. I don't know either though if the definition list will be any better, so any thoughts? --Fyzixfighter 05:58, 16 October 2007 (CEST)
- Indeed. It looks like I've fallen in the evil trap of armchair wiki editing, and forgot to test the readability of the result. At first sight, it would have seemed that by having the words in one column and the definitions in another you can browse through the words easier, without your gaze being caught by the definitions. But now I see that wiki definitions allow you to browse easily through the words and through the definition (without bumping into an endless wall of text). Well, now, knowing that I did not know about wiki definitions before, I think I'm pretty excusable. :-) Valaggar 14:45, 16 October 2007 (CEST)