Wiktionary talk:Votes/2014-08/Migrating from Template:context to Template:cx: difference between revisions
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Angr in topic Rationale
Content deleted Content added
Dan Polansky (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:{{temp|lb}} already has the syntax you're proposing for {{temp|cx}}, and it's the same length. Why not switch straight over to it instead? —[[User:Angr|Aɴɢʀ]] ([[User talk:Angr|''talk'']]) 12:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC) |
:{{temp|lb}} already has the syntax you're proposing for {{temp|cx}}, and it's the same length. Why not switch straight over to it instead? —[[User:Angr|Aɴɢʀ]] ([[User talk:Angr|''talk'']]) 12:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC) |
||
:: Why should the idea of "label" be preferred over "context"? Whether {{temp|lb}} ''already'' has anything is immaterial; copying the code from {{temp|lb}} to {{temp|cx}} is a cinch. What matters is the syntax we want to see in the wikicode. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|talk]]) 12:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC) |
:: Why should the idea of "label" be preferred over "context"? Whether {{temp|lb}} ''already'' has anything is immaterial; copying the code from {{temp|lb}} to {{temp|cx}} is a cinch. What matters is the syntax we want to see in the wikicode. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|talk]]) 12:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC) |
||
::: I prefer "label" because so many of these labels aren't contexts, like "transitive" and "intransitive", or regional dialect labels. But the main point is, surely it's easier to convert {{temp|context|biology|lang{{=}}de}} straight to {{temp|lb|de|biology}} than to convert it first to {{temp|cx|biology|lang{{=}}de}}, then change how the syntax of {{temp|cx}} works, then change the tag to {{temp|cx|de|biology}}, which will leave a lot of tags broken for a long time until a bot gets around to adapting them to the new syntax. —[[User:Angr|Aɴɢʀ]] ([[User talk:Angr|''talk'']]) 12:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:25, 23 August 2014
Rationale
- 1. "cx" is shorter to type and read than "context" or "label" (
{{context}}
,{{label}}
), making the context itself such as "colloquial" stand out more, such as in "cx|colloquial" vs. "context|colloquial". - 2. The provision of language directly without the use of "lang=" is used by
{{l}}
and{{m}}
; if{{m}}
becomes the standard template via Wiktionary:Votes/2014-08/Migrating from Template:term to Template:m, making{{cx}}
work the same way would be worthwhile.
--Dan Polansky (talk) 08:38, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
{{lb}}
already has the syntax you're proposing for{{cx}}
, and it's the same length. Why not switch straight over to it instead? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)- Why should the idea of "label" be preferred over "context"? Whether
{{lb}}
already has anything is immaterial; copying the code from{{lb}}
to{{cx}}
is a cinch. What matters is the syntax we want to see in the wikicode. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC)- I prefer "label" because so many of these labels aren't contexts, like "transitive" and "intransitive", or regional dialect labels. But the main point is, surely it's easier to convert
{{context|biology|lang=de}}
straight to{{lb|de|biology}}
than to convert it first to{{cx|biology|lang=de}}
, then change how the syntax of{{cx}}
works, then change the tag to{{cx|de|biology}}
, which will leave a lot of tags broken for a long time until a bot gets around to adapting them to the new syntax. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- I prefer "label" because so many of these labels aren't contexts, like "transitive" and "intransitive", or regional dialect labels. But the main point is, surely it's easier to convert
- Why should the idea of "label" be preferred over "context"? Whether