Template talk:Infobox Hurricane Small

message: ===Relation to infobox hurricane===
I really like some of the stuff provided by the french template, but I don't think we should have conflicting templates.  We need to adapt what they have to match what  gives (or vice versa), and both templates should have consistent parameters.
* Parameter names.  Formation versus formed, dissipation versus dissipated.
* Parameter values.  category=5 versus category=cat5.  How does their system work with ts's and ss's?
* 2-picture format.  If only one picture is available it should be shown double-sized.  We shouldn't have a not-available picture; that just wastes space.
* Color differential.  In the french template the colors change throughout the infobox.  This is really nice and should be integrated into , but I couldn't quite figure out how to do it.
Jdorje 05:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I can do it in . As for the parameters, I wasn't sure what the parameters in our current infobox were, and I was going to change them anyway. I'm not really sure how to do the double-sized 2-picture format, though. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 07:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the current parameters are pretty good.  The "category" and "type" parameters give needed flexibility for all basins.  I fiddled with the small infobox, and I'm not sure it's better now...but some parts are more consistent at least.  In general the two infoboxes should take the exact same parameters, so you could change an infobox to a small infobox and just get a scaled-down version (though obviously some data simply wouldn't be shown). Jdorje 07:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Err, how could you not know what the current parameters are?  They are well documented. Jdorje 07:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mostly, by not looking. :P By the way, I've changed  now. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 07:24, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nicely done. Jdorje 07:26, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: I really like some of the stuff provided by the french template, but I don't think we should have conflicting templates.  We need to adapt what they have to match what  gives (or vice versa), and both templates should have consistent parameters.
* Parameter names.  Formation versus formed, dissipation versus dissipated.
* Parameter values.  category=5 versus category=cat5.  How does their system work with ts's and ss's?
* 2-picture format.  If only one picture is available it should be shown double-sized.  We shouldn't have a not-available picture; that just wastes space.
* Color differential.  In the french template the colors change throughout the infobox.  This is really nice and should be integrated into , but I couldn't quite figure out how to do it.
Jdorje 05:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I can do it in . As for the parameters, I wasn't sure what the parameters in our current infobox were, and I was going to change them anyway. I'm not really sure how to do the double-sized 2-picture format, though. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 07:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the current parameters are pretty good.  The "category" and "type" parameters give needed flexibility for all basins.  I fiddled with the small infobox, and I'm not sure it's better now...but some parts are more consistent at least.  In general the two infoboxes should take the exact same parameters, so you could change an infobox to a small infobox and just get a scaled-down version (though obviously some data simply wouldn't be shown). Jdorje 07:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Err, how could you not know what the current parameters are?  They are well documented. Jdorje 07:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mostly, by not looking. :P By the way, I've changed  now. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 07:24, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nicely done. Jdorje 07:26, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Relation to infobox hurricane

message: I made some changes, though not all of them are for the best:
* The "Not available" text just isn't useful.  "Intensity: Not available, Not available" or "Duration: Not available-Not available" are not good.  So I changed this text.
* The "category" parameter was inconsistent with the parameters used by , which I feel are pretty much ideal for a template that should work in all basins.  I changed the small template to match these.  It uses , which currently outputs some text but could just as easily give the link to the picture (as was used before).  Of course this template could be embedded directly but it's so long that it would be pretty ugly.
Jdorje 07:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure we can switch it back to using the images, we just have to use the  and  parameters together to figure out which one.  However some of those images are kindof sucky IMO.  (Note the text background matches the color scheme also, and it uses the color templates so it will change automatically if those templates change.) Jdorje 08:24, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: My changes

message: Why is this template duplicated at ?  The latter is misnamed as neither hurricane nor small are proper nouns. — jdorje (talk) 04:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not duplicated, per-se. That's Nilfanion's newer version of the template. I guess he wants us to be able to have two choices as to which one to use - the new one will be a bit different from this one. -- RattleMan 05:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Furthermore, same location will have a lot of junk in the code to make the existing transclusions not break; making a complex template utterly unreadable as source. Caps don't matter in markup.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicated templates?