Template talk:Navbox diacritical marks

	Writing portal This template falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Missing marks

halanta//Virama and visarga. deeptrivia (talk) 23:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —Mykhal (talk) 12:25, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-European diacritics

Should the template contain links to Arabic diacritics, anusvara, chandrabindu and other diacritics from non-European writing systems?--Uanfala (talk) 10:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, why not? +An gr 10:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On stroke and bar

The (horizontal) stroke is missing here, or is it not used as a diacritic at all?
The bar article that is linked to, is about a vertical non-combing character. Sure Unicode will have a combing one? btw, the bar article is confusing about the bar/vertical line/diacritic/punctuation of the bar, and above that also describing the horizontal stroke as one sort of symbol. -DePiep (talk) 08:04, 10 September 2010 (UTC) adding on stroke -DePiep (talk) 08:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should we use the character replacement dotted circle by standard?

I started a talk here at Diacritics -DePiep (talk) 15:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the /sandbox testcases

I have altered the CSS styles in the /sandbox, mostly to reduce unnecessary stuff. Do the testcases still look OK, especially in IE browsers? -DePiep (talk) 16:39, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect display in some browsers

In e.g. Bar (diacritic), the bars are correctly centred on the circles when viewed in Safari (macOS, iOS) or Chrome (iOS), but in Chrome or Firefox (macOS 10.14 or 10.13) the bars are to the right of the circles. – Fayenatic London 15:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Que? -DePiep (talk) 20:51, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Images added. – Fayenatic London 11:36, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same problem seen using Chrome on ChromeOS. I guess it is a browser bug and not anything Wikipedia can do anything about. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:04, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can we change the sample columns to navbars?

Template:Letters with diaeresis Consider for example {{Letters with diaeresis}}. This is one of many such templates that put a long vertical column in each article about each diacritic. I picked that one at random, exactly the same applies to every 'Letters with <insert name here>' template. For readers on desktops or laptops, this is just another column down the right hand side. For readers on mobile (the large majority), it adds screen after screen of excess detail before they get to any text. IMO, this is very poor practice. So I invite comments on a proposal to change this from a sidebar at the beginning of each diacritic article to a navbar at the end. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:00, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, poor practice. Put these letters in a regular box, in its own article section? -DePiep (talk) 13:01, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See {{Letters with diaeresis/sandbox}}. --DePiep (talk) 13:01, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- "Just what the doctor ordered!" That (your sandbox version) is so much more civilized.
- As for the idea of embedding in sections rather than as a concluding navbar, we have a lot of diacritics articles that will each need to be reviewed to see how they would fit in comfortably. I will do that. Would we need to break into separate blocks by alphabet? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:02, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Given the navbox, there are a dozen such templates & articles to handle, right? Overseeable.

New line (new hlist) per script: probabkly not, just make a nice break (single hlist = keeps adding dots...). So: no br newline, and prevent dots there.

"fit comfortably": a regular section like ===Script examples=== would do everywhere. Nice extra: in mobile view the section is the folding mechanism - solved with the same stone. -DePiep (talk) 14:23, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it for now. You can play as you like. BTW, this sectiontitle has "navbox"? Better not for these templates.

See also new Category:Writing system templates, individual characters (7). -DePiep (talk) 14:36, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The new template is so neat (colloquially as well as physically) that there is really no need to agonise about it. I guess we need to leave it a couple of days to see if anyone objects and if not, just do it. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Fontsize? Announcement? (todo code cleanup; maybe reuse header everywhere by transclusion; templatestyles abandon?). -DePiep (talk) 18:01, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fontsize: it was better before. 150% is much too big. Even 125% looks excessive. 110% looks good to my eye, though.

Announcement: we had better mention at each of the diacritic talk pages, we don't want to be called out on a technicality. When you think it is ready to roll, let me know and I will do it (or you can do that too, makes no odds except that it looks more like a collaboration than a solo campaign).

To do: I'm afraid you have lost me in the technical detail. Your judgement call. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:41, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

font-size: i'm not familiar with mobile, but it must be ok there. Also, since it is about diacritics, (some) enlargement is preferabe. It should stand out (technical: old version used templatestyles, maybe wont be necessary). Will think about some announcement, later on. -DePiep (talk) 19:45, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree it needs to be big as some marks are quite small. The enlargement for unichar is quite good but maybe a little bigger? {{big}} produces ü and {{large}} produces ü. They both look the same on my mobile! (using Chrome, not Wikipedia app). But both are easy to read. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:25, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks

New question: where should the wikilinks per letter lead? Diaeresis (diacritic) shows that a lot of letters wikilink to page Diaeresis (diacritic). -DePiep (talk) 13:11, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why would that change? Just as Circumflex is the appropriate target of letters like ŵ (Circumflex doesn't need disambiguation). It seems a reasonable assumption that if somebody clicks on, or searches for, a single letter like ü, the best response is to send them to the diacritic article because we can't know which of the diaeresis or the umlaut they want. Indeed for a letter with a circumflex, it could be the mathematical notation they want. So let the article do the heavy lifting, not the template. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:00, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did [1] and [2]. If the wikilink of a letter (say ⟨Ĭ⟩ in breve) is a redirect to the article Breve, then it should not be linked. For starters, it bolds that link which gives wrong distinction. Linking to an opther diacritic is irrelevant even more. (the demo letters only can link to an article about that letter itself). I don't understand the roundabout route "in article Diaeresis click ü to end up in article Diaeresis". If that letter has no article, then there is no target to link to. -DePiep (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhere in the MOS there must be as statement along the lines of 'do not have self references' because typically if you do they are shown in bold so you don't miss your error. Scanning down the list, the first letter with such a 'self link' is J-with-diaeresis [no pre-composed char available] so what I would do is remove the link in such cases. Your Ĭ is another example of the same error. But other letters, like Ä, do have real target articles and so they should be retained as is. I think we don't need to check if the target article is a redirect back to the diacritic article as someone may revise it at some future date. Does that answer the question? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Note that inappropriate links can be removed too. -DePiep (talk) 06:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So the change would not introduce any new errors but in fact remove some existing ones en passant. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:33, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes a cleanup that could also be done separatel;y/later on (but quite relevant to pursue for quality reasons). -DePiep (talk) 11:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More elements

New question: should there be more elements in the new list? Like, title, of the diacritic explicit? Like "Letters with ⟨◌̈◌̤⟩ (diaeresis)"? And provide something for difference/sameness "diaeresis/umlaut"? Merge acute & double acute?

Also, check for currently missing letterlists? -DePiep (talk) 11:44, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the politics but I suspect that if we start with just a 'like-for-like but horizontal not vertical', we are less likely to hit the "ah yes but" tendency and the whole thing runs aground on an incidental detail. So I would leave the enhancements for Navbar 1.1. No doubt you have seen the barely-held truce over diaeresis v umlaut: open war could break out again with little provocation.

Don't forget we have to do one of these for all 12 diacritics, each with its own specific foibles. So let's get the 'vanilla' Navbar 1.0 out there first and come back later with the enhancements. (But yes, the horizontal form does provide an excellent platform to provide links to the two meanings of the trema, for example - and no doubt the other 11 have similar 'issues'.)

Yes, paired letters with a shared trema should be included if you happen to know them easily, if not let other editors supply.

Accute v double accute : if they currently have separate templates, just repeat as is for now, propose a merge after 1.0 is accepted. The nest of vipers you might step on includes letters with two diacritics (like the ogonek plus trema you identified above). Close the lid for now and tip-toe quietly away.

Is that what you wanted? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:37, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restart 2022: first one live

John Maynard Friedman I propose to put {{Letters with diaeresis/sandbox}} live, into Diaeresis (diacritic), section like ===Example letters/alphabets== .(where? as section 2.3?). Post some notices here and there. The others can follow later, eg when this one is stable. OK? -DePiep (talk) 17:57, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is hugely better. Applause.

Your suggested location looks good to me: I had assumed it would be an infobar at the end but don't feel strongly about it. I suggest that it would be best to introduce it at the article talk page, inviting comment. Some people don't like change, especially if they have never tried to read the article on a mobile, and will need to let off steam. Yes, best to get the air cleared before repeating at other articles, as you have planned. But also let the dust settle a bit before posting more notices here and there. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Placement must be below the sidebar always (no layout interaction). -DePiep (talk) 21:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can you ensure that? How do you know how wide (how narrow!) the screen is? In a perfect world, it would wrap automatically in whatever space is left to the left of the sidebar but I don't know how to do that. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'ensuring' is difficult and can be ugly (eg use {{clear}} = end all boxes before showing this one: may add whitespace (many lines). Will try your suggestion (not fullpage width, nice). Also improving setup, make stable for all 20. Meanwhile, you can follow pilot {{Letters with diaeresis/sandbox}} and enjoy (... or warn me). -DePiep (talk) 18:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Letters with diacritic: letterbox redesign

Following the above § Can we change the sample columns to navbars? discussion with John Maynard Friedman. Until now, the Letterboxes with diacritic show badly in the articles (a massive, inflexible vertical clunk next to vertical {{Diacritical marks}}. This is a MOS:SANDWICH issue. To present these 18 lists better, in many ways, they are redesigned.

The 18 Letterboxes redesigns:

new version is in their /sandbox.

Horizontal box,
More responsive (eg, using css not wikitable),
Same design all 18; like both uc and lc letter in one link: |[[Ö|Ö ö]],
v-t-e linkbox added,
Minor cleanups (rm double targets, rm generic target links like to the diactritic article).

Doc & Test: see {{Letters with diacritic}} (the meta-template) for documentation & overview,
All new versions in the sandbox, like {{Letters with breve/sandbox}}
See Template:Letters_with_diacritic/testcases#Diaeresis_(diacritic),
For testing (comparing old-new) purposes, the new format is presented in vertical column form. The "old2021" version is saved.

I have made new {{Letters with diaeresis}} to go live in Diaeresis (diacritic) § Letters with diaeresis. The section appears in the TOC. When no issues show up, The rollout can continue. -DePiep (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just what the doctor ordered! I had no idea that my idea could actually be realised. Thank you, have a virtual jenever on me

--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:47, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My initial thought was that maybe the font size is too big (even though it is the same as is used in the vertical column version) but the example of "a with breve and acute" ắ at Template:Letters with breve/sandbox quickly disabused me of that notion: even at this large size I needed to magnify to see precisely what the character is. Stet.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no definite preference either (btw, used to be 200%—the version we leave behind). Having to zoom for diactical detials (in the diacritical article ...) is ambivalent too. I have no solution (size top RHS infobox is good, for one). Anyway it's set centrally :-) .

Also open for tweaking: horizontal (inline) spacing, opening text format (the generic diacritic). All is done central like in /header, see template documentation. BTW, big experiments with /.header etc. require /sandboxing not live template!

Done in ten months and ten days [3], I see. I'm sorry for those ten days, bad business contracting. -DePiep (talk) 07:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Todo fot those interested, pick your favourite diacritic:

See Old versions are in page .../old2021; New versions in the ../sandbox (live version is in switchover time). Links ar in top of each documentation. Changeovertime is not defined yet, weeks or months is fine.

Check general appearance, placement in article.
Compare old-new blocks for missing or misformed letters. Help: see Template:Letters_with_diacritic/testcases#Compare_old-new for side-by-side comparing, in vertical boxes! The transition was partly done manually, and there are many exceptions to the basic form.
Check links: links should be by letterpairs ( · A a · ). Sometimes 4-letters per entry, eg in dots (2 dot above, 2 dot below): they have preferred presentation?
Check wikilinks: should be right on target, not to a generic page "~~[[Diacritic x]]~~" or ~~[[Latin letter Z]]~~.
Check for visibility of letters, some may be unknown (like in ogonek, with me: Ǫ᷎ , ǫ᷎).
In general: check your favourite diacritic, the letterlist may need an expert update or correction.
Later: check for completeness (only 18?), check for overlaps (merge some lists, hook below?), redesign big box {{Diacritical marks}}

-DePiep (talk) 07:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done all 18 are live now, in their own section: § Letters with breve. We'll keep te old2021 versions, for a while, to check and compare at /testcases Compare old-new.

-DePiep (talk) 05:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well that seems to have been remarkably free from conservative objections. So maybe I wasn't the only one to find the old version just gross. Thank you for taking it on.

If you are still in the mood, {{Diacritical marks}} is another one that could and should be reworked. I suggest a simple {{infobox symbol}} at the top of the article and a navbar at the bottom giving all the types of diacritic. (I see you have already tagged it but I don't see any volunteers. I'd gladly do it myself but my template skills are way too basic and I don't speak CSS at all.) --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:53, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Already started ;-). Will be new thread. -DePiep (talk) 12:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree the visual aspect of the old version was clunky, I feel that since only two people are discussing this and patting themselves on the back for a job well done, you may have missed that this new template, especially its position, cut down hard on utility. I used the first page of a diacritic article extensively, it was easy just copy-paste what I needed, now it's impractical that I scroll down half a dozen times until I find this template. I hope the two of you may considered this utility issue, thank you. --2A02:2F07:B210:E200:BD60:76C0:B1F3:8EA7 (talk) 16:58, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]