Talk:National Constitution Center

message: A museum advertises by providing information about its exhibits. Incidentally, this is also the information relevant to a Wikipedia entry about a museum. The dividing line between an advertisement and objective information is whether that information is being endorsed as especially interesting or significant. I removed two sections of this article: a quote from a Supreme Court Judge praising the Constitution center, and a bulleted list of the "exhibitions features" which read like it was straight from a museum pamphlet. With these two removed I think the article is mostly free from bias. Thoughts? FlavoredSpace (talk) 22:42, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Written like an Advertisement Tag

message: Any news on the new Exec Dir?--!!!!
Joseph Torsella. Spikebrennan 04:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: News

message: I'm originally from Philly and I remember when they were redeveloping Independence Mall, there was some controversy over building on land that the state had once condemned because of the need for more greenspace in Center City (also taken away for the visitor center and the huge new Liberty Bell pavilion)
Also, I've been at the NCC a few times and I personally think its exhibitions far oversimplify complex political and legal issues for fear of patronizing the relatively constitutionally uninformed masses. The result is a pretty juvenile museum. Does anyone know of any sourceable criticism of the Center along these lines? 24.207.160.25 07:05, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism & Controversy

message: : Also: WP:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_103 - HTML 5 snafu
Far as I can tell, the coords are correct, yet the pushpin appears across the river in Gloucester County.  Any idea what went wrong?  Jim.henderson (talk) 12:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Map from page "170-176 John Street Building"
	
Other factors considered were the CSS class names, but div-tag class="thumbinner" was found to have no effect in shifting the marker. -Wikid77 (talk) 14:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: Why did you switch this back now? The problem with Template:Location map has long since been fixed, and they now look identical. Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Which versions of OS+browser did you test, such as Windows Vista+IE7, or Windows 7+IE8, or which other ones have been "shifting the marker south". All reports seem to indicate the marker shifts lower ("south") when there is a positional glitch. I wish I knew more, and this week, I hope to visit several hotels with "Internet rooms" and confirm the dot-placement for various OS+browser versions. -Wikid77 (talk) 18:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tested in other browsers, and it appears that it's slightly too high in Template:Location map/simple in all cases I've seen. The issue seems to be that you're multiplying top by 99.2 instead of 100, and left by 99.9 instead of 100 (only the former produces a visible defect). Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: * See below: "#Perhaps caption shifts marker" as perhaps another issue which could explain why some {Location_map} markers seem correct but others shifted. -Wikid77 19:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: Map from page "170-176 John Street Building"
With {Location map/simple}	With {Location map} - no caption
So, what happens when the "caption=" is not empty (and shifts the marker lower), where the caption div-section could shift the relative placement of the marker+label, and is this related to a "line-height:0" problem in the caption portion of the map? I am too busy to do much more this hour, but perhaps could compare generated HTML several hours from now. We need people to run more tests with IE7 and IE8. -Wikid77 (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: For clarity, I've reproduced the 4 cases above. At first glance, it seems that Template:Location map displays the point in the same place whether there is a caption or not, and Template:Location map/simple displays the point higher when a caption is not present. I'm investigating further now. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I analyzed the 4 combinations. Location map with a caption is identical to location map without a caption, and location map/simple with a caption is identical to location map/simple without a caption. However, location map/simple displays the mark 1 pixel further to the left than location map does. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: The large versions above exhibit the same result as the normal-sized templates. In this case, location map/simple renders the mark 1 pixel to the left and 3 pixels higher than location map, and presence/absence of the caption does not affect this. This result makes sense, because of the 99.2 and 99.9 being used in Template:Location map/simple for unknown reasons. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have added the exact lat_sec=21.3 & lon_sec=15.6, for the enlarged maps, and now the marker appears correctly in Manhattan with both map templates. -Wikid77 22:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

text: As no-one else seems to have I did a test, using a clean install of XP (done onto a Bootcamp partition of an old Macbook a while ago but never used), of IE6 as its browser, did a screenshot and uploaded it. It confirms that Location map misplaces the map marker when there's a caption. I don't know if this is something to worry about - the most recent stats say IE6 accounts for 0.24% of all requests/0.99% of all page views - there's quite a difference between the figures, suggesting it's not getting files that other browsers find essential. But more generally I don't know how much heed we need to pay to a ten year old badly broken browser that hardly anyone uses.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 13:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:   Okay, I figured that part out. The width of the relative div needs to be specified explicitly. I've fixed that in Module:Location map. John, can you take another screenshot and see if it's fixed now for you? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I also noticed and removed a stray closing div in Template:Location map/simple. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:47, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I've created some specialized maps and markers for the purpose of testing this: :File:Image overlay position tester.png, :File:Image overlay position tester mark.png, and :File:Image overlay position tester reference.png. See the top of Special:Permalink/603918736 for the results of this test. It reveals that on all modern browsers, Template:Location map places the marks with perfect pixel accuracy (as evidenced by the solid gray box), while Template:Location map/simple is slightly off (as evidenced by the strange colors rather than gray in most of the box). Results for IE6 appear inconclusive, as it doesn't support the type of transparency that this test uses. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:36, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The above test, as shown in the screenshot I uploaded earlier, now looks fine i.e. identical with and without the caption in IE6, as seen in the new screenshot.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, for me things look the same now in IE6, IE7 and modern browsers. Any positioning glitches that are left have to do with either inaccuracies in the coordinates, or possibly some rounding errors in the math. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:15, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Jersey 

message: People have reported how Template:Infobox_NRHP was improved by the 2012 fixes to show the correct marker spot in "170-176 John Street Building", but it sets "caption=" empty in . However, Template:Infobox_museum had been showing the marker with a lower "south" shift, while using {Location_map} with a caption(?). Compare maps, with 2nd omitting the caption:
:
 Map from page "170-176 John Street Building"
With {Location map/simple}	With {Location map} - no caption
So, what happens when the "caption=" is not empty (and shifts the marker lower), where the caption div-section could shift the relative placement of the marker+label, and is this related to a "line-height:0" problem in the caption portion of the map? I am too busy to do much more this hour, but perhaps could compare generated HTML several hours from now. We need people to run more tests with IE7 and IE8. -Wikid77 (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: For clarity, I've reproduced the 4 cases above. At first glance, it seems that Template:Location map displays the point in the same place whether there is a caption or not, and Template:Location map/simple displays the point higher when a caption is not present. I'm investigating further now. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I analyzed the 4 combinations. Location map with a caption is identical to location map without a caption, and location map/simple with a caption is identical to location map/simple without a caption. However, location map/simple displays the mark 1 pixel further to the left than location map does. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

text: The large versions above exhibit the same result as the normal-sized templates. In this case, location map/simple renders the mark 1 pixel to the left and 3 pixels higher than location map, and presence/absence of the caption does not affect this. This result makes sense, because of the 99.2 and 99.9 being used in Template:Location map/simple for unknown reasons. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have added the exact lat_sec=21.3 & lon_sec=15.6, for the enlarged maps, and now the marker appears correctly in Manhattan with both map templates. -Wikid77 22:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

text: As no-one else seems to have I did a test, using a clean install of XP (done onto a Bootcamp partition of an old Macbook a while ago but never used), of IE6 as its browser, did a screenshot and uploaded it. It confirms that Location map misplaces the map marker when there's a caption. I don't know if this is something to worry about - the most recent stats say IE6 accounts for 0.24% of all requests/0.99% of all page views - there's quite a difference between the figures, suggesting it's not getting files that other browsers find essential. But more generally I don't know how much heed we need to pay to a ten year old badly broken browser that hardly anyone uses.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 13:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:   Okay, I figured that part out. The width of the relative div needs to be specified explicitly. I've fixed that in Module:Location map. John, can you take another screenshot and see if it's fixed now for you? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I also noticed and removed a stray closing div in Template:Location map/simple. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:47, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I've created some specialized maps and markers for the purpose of testing this: :File:Image overlay position tester.png, :File:Image overlay position tester mark.png, and :File:Image overlay position tester reference.png. See the top of Special:Permalink/603918736 for the results of this test. It reveals that on all modern browsers, Template:Location map places the marks with perfect pixel accuracy (as evidenced by the solid gray box), while Template:Location map/simple is slightly off (as evidenced by the strange colors rather than gray in most of the box). Results for IE6 appear inconclusive, as it doesn't support the type of transparency that this test uses. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:36, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The above test, as shown in the screenshot I uploaded earlier, now looks fine i.e. identical with and without the caption in IE6, as seen in the new screenshot.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, for me things look the same now in IE6, IE7 and modern browsers. Any positioning glitches that are left have to do with either inaccuracies in the coordinates, or possibly some rounding errors in the math. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:15, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perhaps caption shifts marker 

message: I couldn't see major differences between other browsers and IE7. But when there is a caption, there is a 1px gray border on the position frame that holds the image. If you know about CSS boxmodel, you will realize that any image with a caption will thus have 2 px short on the width of frame (the 720px big images above only get 718px frame), skewing the percentage and the position of the marker. DON'T put borders on the position frame that holds the image and the markers. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, no, that's not a problem either. it seems that that was caused by some custom css that i had, that created 2 borders in this case. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

text: Template:Location map already accounts for the problem in any case, as it explicitly sets the width of the border div to width+2 and the div used for positioning to width. Jackmcbarn (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Like i said, i had an additional border. Lua code can't account for stuff that I do :D —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:40, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gray border 

message: I work for the National Constitution Center and I'd like to make some updates to the page. There are currently inaccuracies and out-of-date information and I'd love to help improve the page. Should I post suggested edits here, in the talk page?Housefinch1787 (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating the National Constitution Center Page 

message: Below you will see where proposals from your request have been quoted with reviewer decisions and feedback inserted underneath, either accepting, declining or otherwise commenting upon your proposal(s). Please read the enclosed notes within the proposal review section below for information on each request.  Spintendo  19:07, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply 27-JUL-2019