User talk:CelticWanderer/Book infobox

From Discworld & Terry Pratchett Wiki
< User talk:CelticWanderer
Revision as of 08:52, 12 June 2013 by CelticWanderer (talk | contribs) (→‎Title and caption changes: any more thoughts?)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to CelticWanderer/Book infobox's talk page.
Please be aware of the following....
  • Generally, this page is not designed to be a form, however, general concerns, constructive comments and/or suggestions are always welcome.
  • Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes ~~~~
  • Indent your posts with a colon : if you are replying to an existing topic (or :: if replying to a reply).
Please be....
  • Welcoming and polite.
  • Constructive.
  • Neutral and open to other's comments.
  • Respective of other's opinions, interpretations or expressions.
Please do not...
  • Write anything obscene, abusive, racist or sexist.
  • Write suggestive remarks construed as offensive or derogatory.
  • Write anything designed to be negative and disruptive.
thank you

Well, that works, but I thought the only problem with the old one was the wonky Amazon look-up. We'd still have to acquire a lot of cover images. Otherwise I'd like to lose the black title banner.
It would also need an example: it took me a while to guess the form of the image description and I don't know if it can be captioned. --Old Dickens (talk) 00:50, 10 June 2013 (GMT)

Ok, in response to the above:
  1. The amazon look-up is a good idea but when images are changed, moved or deleted from the source this ultimately affects what we see in the template so it does have a caveat. To be perfectly honest why are the cover images already uploaded to the site not being used to their full potential? I mention briefly here (at the bottom of the section) about the use of license templates, which don't seem to be implemented on this site at, well, not that I can see anyway.
  2. You mention in the 'picture rules' section that you got on fine using low-res images of book covers, so what changed exactly? Using low-res images, providing they are covered by an appropriate license is acceptable. If it so much of a concern has there been any action into asking for special permission from the Terry Pratchett website to use low-res cover images? A template can be used to specifically state permission was granted etc. etc. etc.
  3. Any other cover images not currently uploaded to the site can be done in the same manner.
  4. We can lose the black background of title banner (not remove the banner altogether) and keep it the same colour as the rest of the template.
  5. I will include a fully working example in my user sanbox at some point.
  6. Not quite sure what you mean by "it took me a while to guess the form of the image description", can you elaborate please?
  7. I haven't looked into captions for the cover image. I don't think it works so well with this type if image fill within the table. I can look into it but not sure of the outcome yet. --CelticWanderer  talk | contribs | email 09:34, 10 June 2013 (GMT)
6. The syntax required to bring up an image/file. As I said, I got it but it needed an example. --Old Dickens (talk) 22:32, 10 June 2013 (GMT)

Title and caption changes

I have changed the title background colour to match the rest of the template for now (#f9f9f9) and have added a caption field. I think a slightly darker title banner and maybe a hint of some colour would be a little more eye-catching though. Any suggestions or preferences?
In the example you will see that this template was designed more for filling the image to the full width of the template. If the current width of 285px is too wide (because the book cover image is too large) we can reduce this to a more suitable width. --CelticWanderer  talk | contribs | email 10:20, 10 June 2013 (GMT)

I'd like it more compact altogether: a 240px image filled the old one, but more importantly the fields are taller in this one and it takes a lot of space. I like the full-width image; white spaces have annoyed me for years. --Old Dickens (talk) 22:32, 10 June 2013 (GMT)
The template width is now 240px, therefore, so is the image at full-width. It is pretty compact now; is this any better? How compact does it need to be? The template only takes up a lot of space (height) if you use every field at the same time including the image, which accounts for about half the overall height anyway. --CelticWanderer  talk | contribs | email 07:57, 11 June 2013 (GMT)
Any more thoughts on the changes made to the infobox example? --CelticWanderer  talk | contribs | email 08:52, 12 June 2013 (GMT)