[sword-devel] Wiki front end comparison

[Brian Fernandes]

DM,

Just a few notes on the layout; these changes look great, and the table 
is definitely easier to read. I do agree that the columns are too narrow.

I was recently looking at this wiki page: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers

The comparison tables on this page look pretty good IMHO, the colors 
make the a big difference, making it even easier to discern the 
difference between features offered by various frontends.

I looked at how this was done, apparently you can use a simple template 
for yes, no etc... so instead of √ you would use {{yes}}. This 
would place the text "yes" in the cell with a green background. 
Unfortunately I could not figure out how to easily import the {{yes}} / 
{{no}} templates into our Wiki, perhaps best left to someone with more 
experience. I can try again later tomorrow if nobody gets to it by then 
- if you think this is a good idea.

Brian.

DM Smith wrote:
> DM Smith wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 2, 2009, at 8:43 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>>
>>> Putting data into rows and frontends into columns is so obvious that I
>>> feel now stupid. It is probably too late to fix this for the wiki -
>>> unless you, Eeli, volunteer - the amount has become too much.
>>
>> I'll see about doing this.
> 
> Take a look at the wiki now. I've transposed the first table. I left in 
> the original, so we can revert easily. Or delete it if we like this 
> direction.
> 
> I thought I'd get feedback before we started making this change.
> 
> It probably would have been easier if I printed out the table and then 
> tried to create the new one. I may have missed something.
> 
> I added a row for Testament introductions. These are represented 
> internally by Book 0, chapter 0, verse 0 for the testament in question.
> 
> I used √ because it looks like a check mark. I used × 
> because it looked like an X. I can replace these with the images, if we 
> desire it. I added ½ for partially implemented, but I am not sure 
> that it is needed. We can always split a feature (e.g. book/chapter 
> introductions -> book introductions; chapter introductions) or add a 
> footnote.
> 
> I think the X should mean that a feature is missing but ought to be 
> present.
> 
> It is not clear what a blank cell means. In some cases it means that the 
> feature is a plus but should not be expected in another front end (E.g. 
> journal in Xiphos). That is, it represents N/A. Some times it means that 
> it is not know whether a feature is present or not. That is, it 
> represents ???. I think it is important to minimize maintenance by using 
> blanks and to call out a program's distinctive/unique features.
> 
> A couple of pros about the new layout:
> It is easy to add a feature.
> It is more compact and perhaps easier to read.
> 
> Som cons:
> I don't like the abbreviations. So I added a hover/tooltip giving the 
> full name. (IE allows vertical text and we could do the same with images 
> of the text.)
> 
> The check box columns may be too narrow.
> 
> The footnotes are a bear to maintain. I tried adding the wikipedia Cites 
> package, which as auto numbering. But I did it wrong and it killed the 
> wiki. I'll try later. For now perhaps we should have footnotes per 
> front-end rather than per table or wiki page.
> 
> Blank cells are ambiguous.
> 
> Your input is welcomed. So are your changes to the page!
> 
> In Him,
>    DM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
>