Template talk:Navbox generic/Archive 4

message: Hey guys. I have been noticing that the category field in Template:Big 12 Football Venues, Template:SEC Baseball Venues, etc. (all the similar ones) are not including the category field for some odd reason for the Navbox generic. For instance, I was about to change the one for Template:Big 12 Basketball Venues to a Navbox generic so that it had the v/d/e controls and the division (North and South) could be separated like for Template:Big 12 Football Venues (among others), and I noticed that it was indeed working for that one. The reason the category is important is so it displays the category down at the bottom of all pages where it is (in this case the Big 12 Conference category). The noinclude ones still work, but not the regular category. Is this a fixable problem (am I doing something wrong?) or is just a flaw with the design of the Navbox generic? Any help is appreciated. (Cardsplayer4life 16:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem would be that  doesn't have a category parameter. This should be easy enough to fix, just request a change. --Dinoguy1000 Talk 03:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where would be the proper place to go about requesting such a change at? (Cardsplayer4life 05:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Thank you very much CapitalR. You are a gentleman and a scholar. (Cardsplayer4life 14:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category field problem 

message: When the template is set to auto width the width shrinks significantly when the template is hidden.  Can this behavior be changed so that the width stays the same whether the template is hidden or not? PaulC/T+ 14:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Try "width: xem", where x is a number. But draw back of this is you need to know x in advance, and you need to give enough minimal white space so that there isn't excessive wraping. Another alternative is to not specify any width at all. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 21:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: * Here is a useful little tool I've found in this regard. Regards, David Kernow (talk) 16:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither of these suggestions fix the problem.  The idea is to have a dynamically resized template that when collapsed is the same width as when it is expanded.  There has been some discussion on other pages about the problem.  Is this something that can be resolved or is the "width:auto" function essentially broken when the template is hidden?  The only workaround I've seen is to hardcode the width of the template by ems or use "width:100%" to force the template to span the whole page. Am I missing something here? PaulC/T+ 23:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Edit: More discussion below... PaulC/T+ 23:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I've come up with a possible solution, but I don't know how to implement it.  Essentially what there needs to be user-modifiable "minimum width" and "maximum width" parameters that the template could shrink and expand to without having to resort to width:auto;.  Is this possible? I know you can specify an exact width, but this can look poor on screens with different resolutions... PaulC/T+ 08:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  style="width:auto"