User talk:Verdy p

-- billinghurst (talk) 16:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Over-formatted
Gday. We do not try to force fonts and similarly, not dramatic formatting. We allow users to set their own fonts, if they so choose. You will find that the vast bulk of our works will have relative sizes, little in the way of imposed fonts to the point that most formatting of transcluded pages would fit within this framework



where you have altered those recent works, it would be appreciated if you could review those changes against the indicated formatting. — billinghurst  sDrewth  12:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's because the pages in the margins are NOt properly aligned. We DO NEED that the pages are in a relative division.... – Verdy_p (talk) 12:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyway, if you really want personal fonts, at least correct the default styleheet so that the text is readable and printable. with the new Vector theme, it is impossible to read, fonts are too small, and sans-serif fonts do not allow some types of corrections (not easy to distinguish some characters in the paged view.
 * There's also a bug in the "text" class (which is missing a REQUIRED "position:relative" CSS attribute, for correct handling of page numbers shown in the margin): either the Javascript must be fixed so that it will force it when it regenerates the, or that should really be present in the main.css file as.
 * I had to fix it but surrounding the included pages by:


 * Note:  and   are only necessay if there are distinct chapters ending and starting on the same page.)
 * Note: that the javascript makes no difference between classes "text", "indented-page", and various others; effetively it suppresses all these classes and then internally regenerates inside them a container for a div with class "text" only, and another positioned div for page numbers.
 * There are various bogous CSS in the existing templates (incorrect positioning, lots of unnecessary tweaks, notably for tables. I have fixed some of them in the French Wikisource (where also this extension originated and the developer started to implement it).
 * This javascript has various bugs and is in fact very inefficient (it should better reparent the div, without regerating its inner HTML that is parsed twice...) – Verdy_p (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

template changes
I reverted your recent changes to our templates, put your proposal on the talk or scriptorium and make sure it is agreeable. We are extremely protective of our templates, it must be this way. cygnis insignis 16:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Then we should need another simpler template for small caps where they are used. There's a tradition for small caps that appear after dropped initials, and in TOCs : their letter spacing is almost always increased (by about 0.1em), as well as the word spacing (in TOCs where multiple words are in small-caps), for readability.
 * Could there be a variant named "Template:Sct" (small caps for titling), which combines both styles in a simple way that is easy to edit ?
 * I've never seen any small-caps in books where letter spacing was not also increased (and for easier reading word-spacing too, othersie words are difficult to separate by readers). In fact this should really be the default for all small-caps.
 * – Verdy_p (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't transcribe 'traditional' elements of formatting, they appear in the scan. If an end user wants to render a finer level of formatting or other preference, they should be able to apply that, we cannot displace it with our own preference. Taste on matters of this type, unrelated to meaningful content, will vary greatly; if the reader cares at all. It is expected they would not, they could print the scan if they did, the overwhelming concern is the content.
 * Perhaps, sandbox it and see if there any interest. I believe the current version is simple and effective. cygnis insignis 16:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The motivation is readability (a major part of accessibility). It was true in the traditional formatting but it is still true on the web, especially when reading on screen with low resolution !
 * That's why it should be the default. Otherwise, we would not even need to transcribe small-caps at all, and we would only use lowercase, and we would not even need tpo transcribe raised or dropped initials...
 * I believe I'll make a derived template for combining small-caps and larger letter-spacing because it has lots of interests for readers (older typographs did that for good reasons, they are still valid today), including in modernized typography. The extra spacing was considered in the past for excellent reasons, also be cause it allowed easier identification of texts rendered in small-caps (very frequent in start of sections – Verdy_p (talk) 16:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


 * There can be no urgency, if the change is good it will be accepted. Your approach requires immediate input from me, that is not a polite way to get attention. Get agreement, if not consensus, before changing the templates or their docs. cygnis insignis 16:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)