Jump to content

Help talk:Table

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit]
  • Tool. to fully expand/collapse the table of contents. Help:Table TOC has many subsections.

See diff and HouseBlaster edit summary: "Undid revision 1205566101 by Timeshifter (talk) unanimous agreement against including the link at Help talk:Table#RfC: linking to User:The wub/tocExpandAll.js"

That was a 3 to 1 vote. That is for the link at the top of the article. The link was moved to the "See also" section. It has been there for awhile. Those sections allow somewhat related links. So that 3 to 1 vote does not apply. And Jroberson108 was one of those votes. He does not have a problem with somewhat related links being in the "See also" section.

See the revision history for Template:Static row numbers. See the 3 diffs starting at 01:34, 14 January 2024‎. The one at 11:24, 14 January 2024‎ says: "Clarified the relation. Undid revision 1195546324 by Jroberson108". User:Jroberson108 thanked me for that clarification, and left that somewhat related link. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Timeshifter: Please don't assume my opinion, just ask. I think the consensus clearly says that there is "no" relation, not even "somewhat". Since there is some question about my opinion, then I'll reclarify it in the RfC. Jroberson108 (talk) 03:26, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To keep the current discussion here, I oppose including the link anywhere on this page. It has nothing to do with tables. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 03:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HouseBlaster. You previously wrote: "To be clear, I use the tool. I agree it is useful. But I don't think it needs to have a link in the lead of a help page on tables." That is why I moved it to the "See also" section. As I said in another discussion. It is not about me. This is not a chess game between you and me. It is about what is best for the reader. --Timeshifter (talk) 04:46, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I stand by that comment, because it certainly does not belong in the lead of a page on tables. But it also does not belong in the see also section on tables. I know this is not a game between us. What is best for readers is keeping it simple, which means only including information about tables. Just because you and I use a tool does not mean it should be on this page. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 05:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Just because you and I use a tool does not mean it should be on this page." Why not? There is no rule that it can't go in the "See also" section. What does KISS principle have to do with one useful link being put in the "See also" section? It was there for weeks. How does it hurt anything? It obviously helps since both you and I use it. I am waiting for a guideline against it being there. Otherwise it is WP:IJDLI. See: WP:CIVIL says: "Editors are expected to be .. responsive to good-faith questions." --Timeshifter (talk) 05:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Timeshifter, I have said my piece. I am not required to WP:SATISFY you: I believe that it violates the KISS principle by including something that does not have anything to do with tables. It "hurts" because it is distracting from the table-related resources. That is my opinion. Please respect it. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 05:21, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HouseBlaster. How is it "distracting" from the table-related resources? It actually helps find them in the TOC. And how is it distracting at all? It is at the bottom of the page in the "See also" section. You didn't even notice it being there for weeks. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:26, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to respond further. See WP:SATISFY. It is distracting. If you think I am being uncivil, feel free to file a request at WP:ANI. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 05:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have not repeated myself. I have responded to your points one by one. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose including the link anywhere on this page. It has nothing to do with tables. Jroberson108 (talk) 03:38, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jroberson108. It helps to fully expand/collapse the table of contents. Help:Table TOC has many subsections. I use it all the time here. HouseBlaster uses it. Why not allow others to have that opportunity?
It may not be directly related to tables, but it certainly is a help. So since it is helpful with the long TOC here, then it should go in the "See also" section.
See: WP:CIVIL says: "Editors are expected to be .. responsive to good-faith questions." You have not addressed any of my points or questions in either talk section. Your position is apparently WP:IJDLI. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't assume my opinion, my thoughts, or bad faith. Can the hierarchy of the sections not be simplified so you don't feel a need for the tool? That would benefit everyone. Jroberson108 (talk) 06:03, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#"See also" section. There is nothing in there against having this kind of link. It says (emphasis added): "Links in this section should be relevant and limited to a reasonable number. Whether a link belongs in the 'See also' section is ultimately a matter of editorial judgment and common sense. One purpose of 'See also' links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics;" --Timeshifter (talk) 05:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment for others reading this. See Phabricator tasks:
T302426. ToC test "show all sub-sections" button
T333801. Vector 2022: consider showing closed sections of the TOC by default
Please comment there so that developers know there is a continuing desire for a TOC toggle that alternates between expand all and collapse all. --Timeshifter (talk) 03:27, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help table header

[edit]

With all those links to main page's subpages one gets easily in the sea of links. To resolve that, I feel a help table header is long overdue, hence why I am opening this discussion. Qwerty284651 (talk) 06:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you are asking. Please clarify.
A template would be nice. That would save me some work adding new table help pages. I may create a template. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I meant an actual header: Template:AWB, Template:Village pump page header. Qwerty284651 (talk) 18:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What would you put in it? --Timeshifter (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These links categorized by tabs: basic, advanced. Haven't come up with a list of tabs of which like would go where. Qwerty284651 (talk) 20:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What would you put it in? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Inside a separate page header titled, for example "Help table header or Help table tab header and have that transcluded on all help table (sub)pages. Qwerty284651 (talk) 20:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are only four subpages, of which one is a template and another is the doc for that template. That leaves just two, Help:Table/Advanced and Help:Table/Width. Do we really need a header for those? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let me rephrase that. A table header...anything table related. There are many table help pages that could be structured in an organized manner with a header. These merit a banner: Help:Tables and VisualEditor, Help:Creating tables, Help:Wikitable, Help:Basic table markup, Help:Table/Advanced, WP:Advanced table formatting, Help:Tables and locations, Help:Sortable tables, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Tables, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial, H:TABLE, Help:Wikitable. Create a banner containing the aforementioned links. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of putting a table or div around the links for now. And then putting that in a template. Such as: Template:Table help. 

<div style="border:solid 1px; padding-left:4px; padding-right:4px;">For more help, see [[Help:Table]], [[Help:Introduction to tables with VisualEditor/1|Help:Tables and VisualEditor]], [[Help:Creating tables]], [[Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup/1|Help:Wikitable]], [[Help:Basic table markup]], [[Help:Table/Advanced]], [[Wikipedia:Advanced table formatting|WP:Advanced table formatting]], [[Help:Tables and locations]], and [[Help:Sortable tables]]. For style info, see [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Tables]]. For accessibility, see [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial]].</div>

It requires full internal links under any shortened labels. So that the link is black, bold, and unclickable when the template is on that page. If you use a shortcut in the template (such as Help:Wikitable) as the underlying link, it will be clickable on that page.

Example: Help talk:Table ([[Help talk:Table]]) link on this page. Talk ([[Help talk:Table|Talk]]). --Timeshifter (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I say go for it. And then replace all headers in the pages above with the template. Sort of a like a predecessor to the header. A transition. Qwerty284651 (talk) 11:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done, and added to table help pages: Template:Table help. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scope=row in bottom row in long tables?

[edit]

A year ago I started a discussion on whether scope=row should be used for the bottom row or use |-style="background-color:#EAECF0; font-weight:bold; text-align:center" to get the same result. In the meantime, a scrolling table template was created: {{sticky table start}}, which makes the col headers sticky and solves the need for a scoped bottom row as a copy of the top row...on smaller screens, for the most part, and on mobile but NOT for wider screens. In my case (table 1 and table 2), the col headers are not sticky when scrolling vertically, which would then need a copy of the top row in the bottom.

Which leads me to this question: do I/should I use scope=row or only visually mimic bolded/gray color appearance that scope produces using the above wiki markup in the aforementioned tables or leave them as is? Qwerty284651 (talk) 21:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your table 1 and table 2 examples are identical. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed 2nd table to link to the doubles page. Qwerty284651 (talk) 08:50, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Something is flaky with that table. The sticky top header row comes and goes as I move my mouse or scroll. I would remove all the unnecessary stuff, one-by-one, to see what is causing it:
Remove style="height:3em" from the header row. This may be causing the problem because sticky templates are tuned to the headers.
Remove {{big}} from header text.
Remove style="font-size:95%"
Remove class=nowrap
Some of the above 4 may be the problem. Some may work together to cause the problem. The top 3 are totally unnecessary. Nowrap is useful for keeping the lines from wrapping. But that means people will be scrolling horizontally more.
Scope=col and scope=row are probably not part of this problem, at least not by themselves. They are unnecessary, though, for simple tables. As this table is.
--Timeshifter (talk) 08:21, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I usually scope in all table headers regardless of the table's complexity to be on the safe side with accessibility-compliance. I am still wrapping my head around when to use scope and when not. Help:Table#Scope is provided in an example of a simple table, so I assume it should be used everywhere.
The above 4 markups are just cosmetics. Will eliminate them 1 at a time in my sandbox. Qwerty284651 (talk) 08:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Removing scope="row" would cause accessibility issues. In tables, generally speaking, header cells are implicitly column scope unless the scope= attribute is provided. For a header cell at the top of a column of data cells, you can use an explicit scope="col" but don't need to. For header cells at the left of a row of data cells, such as the years in the Table 1 example, scope="row". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scope=row is not needed for simple tables. See:

Help:Table#Scope is a generalization, because going into the specifics baffles many new table editors. And because it is based on a very old MOS guideline written in the days of yore before the many improvements of screen readers. Experienced table editors read the actual WCAG, etc. guidelines, and see that on simple tables it serves no purpose. But I don't want to argue about it. Read the links for yourself and decide. It certainly doesn't hurt anything to add more rather than less scopes. --Timeshifter (talk) 21:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Qwerty284651 (talk) 14:12, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bug report: caption prevents sorting

[edit]
Moved from Template talk:Sticky table start#Bug report: caption prevents sorting
 – Qwerty284651 (talk) 23:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a caption to a sortable table prevents sorting. sticky-table-head is not the cause. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:31, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It also undoes any row-/colspan in mobile which is bizarre. Removing headerSortUp and sticky-table-unsticky didn't solve the problem. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Qwerty284651: From the looks of it, you replaced
|-

with 

|+Per player

instead of 

|+Per player
|-
Jroberson108 (talk) 22:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Meant to add caption before the first row thusly. Qwerty284651 (talk) 23:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rowspan/Background interaction

[edit]

How do you stop rowspans and background colours interacting?

i.e.

Normally this would happen:

   
 

How do I make the table so row two's colour is all across row two but I still have a cell that spans from row one into row two while keeping the colour of row one? Mn1548 (talk) 15:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mn1548: You can't. It's how table cells have always (i.e. since HTML 3.2 way back in 1997) worked. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks Mn1548 (talk) 21:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Search table help pages

[edit]

I am trying to add the following search form to Template:Table help. But I need to prefill the search with this: 

<inputbox>
id = style-searchbox
type=fulltext
width=20
break=no
namespaces=Help** 
searchbuttonlabel = Search table help pages
</inputbox>

How do I do that? --Timeshifter (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you don't, as such. You need to provide the search parameters in a supported way. There's a lot there, but taking them one by one...
offset=0
That's the default, you don't need to specify that
limit=50
Is it really necessary to pre-decide on a limit value? That's probably also the default, anyway.
ns12=1
You have the namespaces param already
search=intitle%3Atable
That's searchfilter=intitle:table, to an <inputbox>...</inputbox>. However, the docs seem to imply that it only works with type=search, not type=fulltext, so you may have to switch types.
advancedSearch-current={%22fields%22:{%22intitle%22:%22table%22}}
I don't think you can set up an advanced search with the <inputbox>...</inputbox>, but those params look redundant with the searchfilter args so hopefully it'll work without them.
So looks like it should be just,
<inputbox>
id=style-searchbox
width=20
break=no
type=search
searchbuttonlabel=Search table help pages
searchfilter=intitle:table
namespaces=Help** 
</inputbox>
Though I also wonder if prefix=Help: might work better than the namespaces= parameter? FeRDNYC (talk) 05:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Testing with Special:ExpandTemplates shows that searchfilter= does actually work with type=fulltext, so you're good there. FeRDNYC (talk) 05:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ohhhh! Now I see what namespaces= is about.
The ** suffix doesn't really do anything unless you have at least two namespaces specified. Then, it shows checkboxes directly in the form, and ** decides which one(s) is/are pre-checked. So, for example, if I add ,Wikipedia to the definition above...
But if you're just specifying a single namespace, you don't need the ** following it. FeRDNYC (talk) 05:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! 

<inputbox>
id=style-searchbox
width=20
break=no
type=fulltext
searchbuttonlabel=Search table help pages
searchfilter=intitle:table
namespaces=Help
</inputbox>

It may need to wrap if necessary in portrait view in mobile view. Though I notice that the search form shrinks as needed, as I narrow my browser window. So maybe it does not need to wrap. Will look at it in mobile phone.

And is it possible to get it to open the results in a new tab? I have the gadget preference enabled for "Open search results in a new tab or window when holding down the Ctrl key".

But it does not seem to be working for this. (Oops. The problem is with Firefox. Other browsers work).

I went ahead and added it to the template so I can see how it looks in my mobile phone:

--Timeshifter (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Currently there isn't a way to open the results in a new tab, that request is tracked as T253940. FeRDNYC (talk) 17:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info and link. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I shortened it to "Search all" in order to get it to fit in portrait view in my cell phone. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:25, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help_talk:Table&oldid=1245459353"