I can't seem to tell without a scorecard whether I should be adding or removing breadcrumbs... maybe add them on odd-numbered days and remove them on even? I don't have strong feelings either way, but we need one consistent standard! Dan Tobias (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
- I find the layout of the formatInfo box awkward and the breadcrumbs better visually. I have been making both, but have been seeing breadcrumbs removed. Is there a way to apply two categories at the same level in the formatinfo box? For example, GeoTIFF should be both Graphics and Geospatial. I have only found out how to apply Geospatial as a subcategory of Graphics. swanQ (talk)
- @Dan: Once I added the ontology to the infobox, I stopped adding adding breadcrumbs to pages; I can't control what other people do.
- @swanQ: There are two issues here. One is the fact that breadcrumbs imply a navigational hierarchy that can fall apart, e.g. when you have a format that falls into multiple categories. The other issue is that the breadcrumbs (as they are currently formulated) provide no way to track their use or attach additional semantics to them. Using a template such as Template:FormatInfo is a way to rectify that. Now, I admit that the template in its current form does not support having multiple categories—but the beauty of using a template is that you can change it once and immediately have the change be propagated to all pages that use it. You cannot do that with the breadcrumbs, which are currently just a simple table. The way I designed the infobox was inspired by the many infoboxes on Wikipedia, such as those used for species or languages. However, those mostly do not have to deal with multiple hierarchies. We will need to come up with a solution for that, which we can discuss someplace like Template talk:FormatInfo. A couple of options: (1) modify FormatInfo to allow multiple hierarchies; (2) create a separate template for breadcrumbs or another representation of hierarchy that we can then use on pages. I don't know what the best solution is. Gphemsley (talk) 19:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
- @Gphemsley: I understand the issues. I just don't have any experience with infoboxes or time to dig into them. It would be nice to have the hierarchy entered in the infobox laid out in a more readable way. I do see it as essential to allow a format to be in multiple categories. Could one have Other Categories in the formatinfo box, to allow adding individual categories (not the full hierarchy) in a way that the extra categories would show up in the bottom row of links. That way a format would live in the hierarchy in a primary positon, but could be reached via other appropriate category terms. BTW, how does one get the timestamp on a talk contribution. I don't find any help on that. swanQ (talk)
Hi, was just wondering why you undid my blanking of the page? The redirect will have to go at some point, as the file extension .d00 is used for at least one other audio format (JCH-D00) and I believe is used for some kind of Commodore 64 data as well. Not looking to argue about it or anything, just curious. Halftheisland (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- Having a blank page (which is not the same as a deleted page) doesn't help anybody. If you know that "D00" can refer to multiple formats, then you (or somebody else) should create the disambiguation page. Until then, D00 should redirect to the new location of the page that used to be there. Gphemsley (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)