Template talk:jump

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search


Could include the results of the template in an in-line example section?. Thanks in advance. -- 13:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


Some comments about the interface, after having a quick look in Safari 3.1/Mac and Firefox

  1. Jumping back up to the sense links to the end of the definition. This is a serious problem in my mind, because it often scrolls the browser window so that the definition's start is hidden above the top of the browser window, and the next sense is the first prominent item in the window. The reader's context is changed, and the place of focus is either confusing or hidden.
    • One way to fix this could be to make the template a container, with the entire definition as parameter 1. It could then put the anchor at the beginning, and the superscripts at the end. Might be a bit more cluttered for editors, though.
  2. The counter-clockwise arrows look a bit like "go to the end" or "rotate" to me. If they more clearly said "back" or "up", they would help prepare the reader for the context jump up the page.
  3. The counter-clockwise arrows also show up as blank boxes in the translation headers in Safari, presumably because my system doesn't have a bold version. The links' font-weight should just be set to normal. (But each of my suggested alternate arrows above works in boldface.)
  4. Some of the link abbreviations are confusing.
    • Syn. and ant. are conventional abbreviations, while syno. and anto. look odd. Transl. is less ambiguous than trans. Illo. is a conventional abbreviation for illustration, while img is only natural to HTML coders. If it's unclear, then perhaps they need periods: syn. - ant. - note - coord. - img. - transl.
    • I see use and coord, which are unfamiliar to me. I have to click, then scroll up some to find that they stand for "Usage notes" and "Coordinate terms". I may have guessed the first if it was abbreviated note or usage. Coordinate terms needs an expanded tooltip
  5. Context for back-links is a bit confusing because it is separated from the qualifier, which acts as a bullet heading. (I also think the terrible brackets-colon construction looks illiterate, but that's a separate issue.)
    (unit of length): ↺ - trans inch, yard, mile
    • The following might be clearer:
      (unit of length↺ - trans): inch, yard, mile
  6. A space before the superscript doesn't seem right.
    • It is conventional in typography to set a superscript close to the punctuation it follows, or even kern it over a period.
    • The note may wrap to the beginning of a line, which breaks the connection between note and noted. Better to use a non-breaking space, or better still to omit the leading space.
      The bottom edge of a sail.coord - trans
  7. Multiple notes don't need three characters to separate them, for both stylistic and practical reasons.
    • A hyphen is not a dash. Better to use a spaced en dash.coord – trans If so, then lead it with a non-breaking space so it won't appear at the beginning of a line (apart from in browsers which ignore non-breaking spaces).
    • A middle dot de-emphasizes the punctuation.coord · trans
    • I think a simple comma works, too.coord, trans

 Michael Z. 2008-04-24 17:20 Z

Regarding no. 4, figure (fig.) is the editorial term which covers photos, drawings, illustrations, pie charts, text-based diagrams, etc. The entry subheading could be == Figures ==.
Illustration is not really suitable, because it typically refers to a rendering or drawing created by an illustrator, and excludes photos and others. IMG is a class of embedded image file in HTML—in other contexts, image is more likely to refer to the subject or content of an illustration or photo. Michael Z. 2008-04-24 17:54 Z
Great stuff, thanks.
I've implemented 2,4,6, and 7, more or less; more tweaking is probably in order. Re #4, my original thought was to have these display as a value which could also be fed to the template (minimizing confusion), but "syn" and "ant" are likely to be read by the template as language codes for the Senaya and Antakarinya languages, which would be problematic. I've scotched that idea for now, anyway.
5 requires a bit more work, but I'll get to it soon.
Re #1, I really really really don't like the idea of wrapping an entire definition in a template -- IMO it would be somewhat self-defeating if this template made the wikitext substantially harder to read. But you're right that having them on the end is problematic. ... although really, any definition that wraps on a normal browser probably needs to be trimmed anyway. I wonder if we could get away with putting them at the beginning of the line, right after the context labels? Will give this a try in a couple of entries. Might be too noisy. -- Visviva 12:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Wow, thanks.
Regarding #1, although browser windows on Windows are often maximized, on the Mac OS they always float, and many users keep them narrowed to improve readability of flexible web layouts like Wiktionary. And don't forget, there are now more web browsers in little cell phone screens than there are on desktops. So many or most definitions may wrap. Michael Z. 2008-04-26 04:15 Z
Oh, right, the mobile web. <shudder/> I try to forget about that whenever possible. Hmmm.... I tried front-loading a couple of definition lines, but it looked really odd. I wonder if there is some kind of JS magic that can get around this. -- Visviva 05:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Further to #1: Much to my own astonishment, this seems to work, moving superscripts to the end of the line while leaving the anchor at the beginning:
function moveJump() {
 var allLines = document.getElementsByTagName("li");
 for (var i = 0; i < allLines.length; i++) {
    var allNotes = allLines[i].getElementsByTagName("span");
    var allDeflists = allLines[i].getElementsByTagName("dl");
    for (var j=0; j < allNotes.length; j++) {
       if (allNotes[j].className == "jump-links") {
           var currentNote=allNotes[j];
           if ( allDeflists.length > 0) {
addOnloadHook( moveJump );
... tho' I haven't tested it across browsers yet. Of course the above code would need to be in the default skin if this template is actually going to be used widely, before which time hopefully some skilled technically-inclined person will fix it up. -- Visviva 10:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
I've taken a stab at addressing #5. I went a bit further than your suggestion, and wikilinked the sense label. See for example User:Visviva/head#Antonyms. This seemed more compact and elegant at the time, but now I'm less confident; it's a lot of blue. -- Visviva 15:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
The backlinks should be indicated consistently in the various parts of the entry. Perhaps always linking both arrow and qualifier together? I don't really mind the blue.
Superscripts are obviated when most of them are as long as the phrases they are attached to. The format is used for footnote references in prose, to clearly indicate the label copy as existing outside of the scope of the text, while remaining visually unobtrusive and not interrupting continuous reading.
Perhaps some other format is called for here, like brackets, small caps, font style or face.
Hm, that is a lot of blue in the brackets. Maybe it's best to only link down from the senses, and back to the definitions, but not between the various supplementary sections. Michael Z. 2008-05-01 17:05 Z
I've deblued it somewhat, returning to your original suggestion (more or less).
I'm now thinking that it would be most elegant to modify the JS above so that the superscripts are carried to the end of the line in the supplementary sections also, thus making navigation consistent throughout the entry.
Dropping inter-section links would definitely simplify the use of this template, but it would also make me kind of sad. ;-) I'd prefer to keep that functionality unless it really proves to be untenable. -- Visviva 06:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion debate[edit]

Green check.svg

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, though feel free to discuss its conclusions.


I find this template ugly and distracting. At best, it needs some cleanup and to be used appropriately, for example on emendate it links from the definition to the synonyms and vice-versa, although they are only a few lines apart, so there is no scrolling. I also dislike the like superscript blue links which I find distract me from reading the entry, as they are eyecatching.

Furthermore {{jump|s|correctly}} counts as a transclusion for {{correctly}} which then appears in Special:WantedTemplates, which is what I'm trying to clean up now, but there are a lot of 'phantom' transclusions. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't think phantom transclusion constitutes a good reason to delete this.
As to its being distracting, I could see eliminating it in short entries which don't need such an aid. On longer entries the blue links are all that would lead a user to experiment with them. Would subscripting better differentiate them from footnote references?
Keep When and if Visviva returns, I will be able to tell him that I resisted the trashing of his effort to resolve the problem of navigating our most polysemic entries. DCDuring TALK 12:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps just fix then (although I still dislike its format) as for a template that does a pretty simple job, it shouldn't be so complicated. --Mglovesfun (talk) 18:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
A lot of the code seems to be to make it impossible to misuse it. It also does something that I thought was impossible; to transclude templates without using them whether they exist or not, without using #ifexist. There's no documentation so I'll have to work out what it does then simplify it. --Mglovesfun (talk) 11:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
The more I look at this, the more I think the principal problem is in incorrect use, which might be helped by documentation. A secondary problem is getting users to understand the use of the links. If it were universally deployed on long (multi-screen) etymology or PoS sections users might become familiar enough with it to actually use it. Using it on short sections causes no apparent change, which is an unhelpful learning experience. To universally deploy it would require agreement (at least BP) and a run to determine "long" Etymology and PoS sections. OTOH, there is always the possibility of deleting what one does not understand, increasingly the fashion. (In this case, the response to my modest pushback has been quite reasonable. Thank you). If not more widely deployed, this experiment will die eventually. (Although the Shorthand header has lasted for quite a while.) DCDuring TALK 00:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I do appreciate that. :-) -- Visviva 01:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes I agree; I don't fully understand the template yet; there is an #if:exist on one of the subpages which explains, sort of, the transclusion of non-existent templates without breaking anything. It seems to also detect the use of jump on the same page. So far, it seems to me that
  1. It creates an archor to allow links to a given definition, not just #Noun, #Verb, etc.
  2. It creates link to these anchors
  3. Most cleverly, it detects which of these anchors are present and links to all of them
So it's not as simple as I first thought. It perhaps does more than even this! And regarding what you've said about where to use it, in short entries it's literally useless as it links to adjacent sections. If the page isn't long enough to allow scrolling, or not much, it achieves nothing; the anchor link won't work. As an example, compare suntan, suntan#English, suntan#Noun and suntan#Verb. That's what the template can achieve on a short page, whilst significantly making the page larger. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:31, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
And I can't find that #ifexist: I talked about; it seems to translude template {{{2}}} or {{{3}}} without actually using them in any way whatsoever, meaning it doesn't matter if the template exists or not, so an ifexist isn't necessary. I'm defeated on this one, mainly because I'm not sure what the template is supposed to do. This leaves me with Special:EmailUser and absolutely nothing else. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:47, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
No objection. It was originally created as an experimental approach to managing entries for complex, high-frequency words like go and do. (See original discussion.) The original concept required two things for it to actually work, neither of which have come to pass AFAIK: a community of people whose primary interest on Wiktionary would be in working on these incredibly thorny entries (which typically require hours/days of head-scratching before one can really get started), and a bot that would keep the various invocations of {{jump}} in sync with each other within an entry. I now have the skills to code up the bot, but without a real community of interest there is probably not much point. Also, I've come to think that these particular issues are probably better addressed through downstream reprocessing; hacking the MW interface can only get us so far.
In terms of the basic template function, it doesn't really do anything too exotic. You tell it what section it's in, and feed it the gloss and a list of other sections that have information about the gloss; it generates an anchor for its own section-gloss combination and links to the others. (This is why a bot would be needed, to update when e.g. a set of synonyms are added for a gloss that previously only had translations.) The intended usage is seen here: User:Visviva/head#top_part. If one borrows a couple of lines of CSS from Wikipedia, it can actually create a pretty nice visual effect.
The weird transclusion behavior is almost certainly due to the invocation of {{isLanguageCode}} to determine whether the second argument is the gloss or a language code, in which case the gloss is the third argument. {{isLanguageCode}} in turn functions in part by invoking the string passed to it as a template and seeing whether it functions like a language-code template ... and that of course results in the phantom transclusion of every gloss. Not exactly ideal behavior.
A final point in this template's disfavor, in fact, is probably this abuse of {{isLanguageCode}}. There are undoubtedly ways of avoiding this -- by having separate templates for English and LOTEs, or just by requiring named args -- but as it stands, it's a ugly and expensive hack, which might not be so problematic except that this template is designed specifically for those pages that are already groaning under a massive load of templates; a reasonably complete entry for a fifty-definition word is likely to contain thousands if not tens of thousands of translations alone (each with its own {{t}} invocation(s)), along with God knows what else. Adding hundreds of invocations of {{jump}} in its current form -- in the unlikely event anyone were champing at the bit to do so -- would probably not be a great idea.
So yeah, sadly, probably not a keeper. And since presence in Category:Experimental templates doesn't appear to have prevented casual misuse, deletion seems reasonable. After deletion, I might perhaps re-userfy it in case I or someone else decides to reevaluate this approach. -- Visviva 01:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Glad we waited for the explanation. The community of those who work on the hard entries now consists almost solely of Widsith. I had vaguely hoped that we could figure out how to decompose the work on big English entries into steps that could be undertaken as apprenticeship tasks, leading to journeyman status on middle-size entries, and eventually master status on the real hard cases. DCDuring TALK 03:55, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Keep but user better. --Mglovesfun (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Kept for no consensus. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:36, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Linking to senses from other articles[edit]

Can this be used to create anchors for senses that can be used by other articles? LokiClock 22:37, 20 August 2011 (UTC)