[Wanderer]

So.... should wiki (tables) be a references for the current forthcoming official release (3.6.9) or rather for the most recent CVS builds? I kinda favor the 3.6.9 branch but what do you think?

My current idea involves the use of subpages - like i have done with ships.tbl - with subpages being just simple lists

Main page
CVS subpage
Retail subpage

[karajorma]

I don't like the idea of explaining new CVS build flags on a seperate page. For one thing CVS will eventually become 3.7 so all that info will have to be transfered. For another mod developers will be using CVS builds quite a lot because that's the only way to get access to the new features their mods asked for. Since they are by and large exactly the people who will be using the wiki table section I don't think it's quite right to stick them in their own section if that means more hassle to update.

I'd prefer to see a system where new flags had a since option that showed when they were introduced.

[Wanderer]

Well... that option will make the pages well over 32 kb lenght that seems for some reason to be critical for wiki... So they wont show properly with all the browsers (or that is what wiki claims atleast). Also there will problems if the syntax changes like it does with subsystem flags.

[karajorma]

If that 32kb limit can't be solved then fair enough. Having the entry twice with dates as Pre 3.6.9/ Post 3.6.9 would deal with syntax problems. That said if someone is willing to port the CVS section to the main one when 3.7 comes out I'm okay with seperate pages.

[Wanderer]

I think the 32 kb thing is more browser related than wiki related... i think we have already had one incidence of this kind though... there... i kinda doubt that Goober would have actually wanted to remove some of the sample entries.

The related error i get is like this:
WARNING: This page is 36 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.

So it might apply only to edits made with certain browsers... If so then i have no issues with only single page but i do not know much about this issue.

[WMCoolmon]

I don't suppose it's possible to color-code the preformatted text according to version? That would (by far) be the most convenient solution for checking compatibility.

[Wanderer]

As it seems no one else is interested in voting for this issue i think it is decided then... With three (3) votes ... kinda proves the interest community has on improving the fswiki

And about the preformatted.... well... I aint any expert on these issues but afaik we could (try to) edit the main css file to include few ''extra'' classes like 367 and 369 and then simply use something like

Code: [Select]

<div class="369">
Something 369 related
</div>It might work out very nicely.. then again.. it might not

[WMCoolmon]

My suggestion falls between the options so I didn't vote.

[karajorma]

I posted rather than voting too

[Goober5000]

I voted.

[Wanderer]

I think i have now finally added all the tables (well... retail atleast) to the wiki...

And about the page lenght... What about just splitting the too long pages in half? Like into parts 1 and 2?

[Wanderer]

So time to BUMP this one





Now there http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Weapons.tbl is a page that i updated..

Do you think that is a change for the better or for the worse? Or something else


I also reseted the poll so feel free to vote.

[ARSPR]

It's much more prettier    but the page is more difficult to update  . (Why {{Table36| }} generates 3.6.x in purple colour?)

OTOH I wouldn't post "future features" like 3.7. It can lead to people to think 3.7 is out. Maybe fix it telling "Expected in future 3.7"

(As another example, I'm waiting for 3.6.10 is out before posting this Taylor's addition.

[Wanderer]

It actually uses a few different tones of blue but not purple at all... #88D and #CCF, and similar set of greens. Basically just to make the improvements easier to notice than what they used to be.

And 'more difficult' to update? How so? Main idea in the whole change was to 'merge' the 36 and 37 branches into a single article while keeping the features found from different branches clearly and easily noticeable. Also now the page uses 'version templates' so that all changes made to version tags can be easily done globally. If the colors are bad they can be changed.. now that is just easier than what it used to be.

[Wanderer]

After immense total of 2 votes (of which the second one is mine) and one post i think its time to beg people to post comments and vote..



...again...

[Snail]

Provided the errors can be easily fixed the new version is better IMO.

[jr2]

I dont' know how the tables used to be, so how am I supposed to vote?  You know, ppl use FSWiki as a reference... just because you don't use the encyclopedia or dictionary or phone book every day doesn't mean you aren't extremely thankful to have them at your disposal.

[Wanderer]

Link to old version.. http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php?title=Ships.tbl&oldid=10659

[jr2]

New version FTW!

[Wanderer]

New version won.. case closed