Difference between revisions of "Property talk:Description"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (reply) |
m (more) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:I agree this is a useful property. It's site-enhancing potential is already quite apparent from the relatively few documents that have been u/graded to date. However, I think 500 Characters is too many; to big a temptation to include a Carriag-return. Whilst preparing the JFK timeline xml data I discovered (after time-consuming investigation) that the existence of a <Cr> character in a property has considerable 'screw-things-up' potential. At best it simply breaks the property instance; at worst it cascades through any templates using it with unpredictable consequences. I guess it may be possible to physically prevent the use of a <Cr> character with a form field restriction but in any event I think 250 characters is probably enough (I haven't been tempted to use more yet anyway :-) - longer commentary can go in the 'Wikispooks Comment' section. The form IS currently restricted to 250 chacters (I think) --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 14:30, 3 January 2014 (GMT) | :I agree this is a useful property. It's site-enhancing potential is already quite apparent from the relatively few documents that have been u/graded to date. However, I think 500 Characters is too many; to big a temptation to include a Carriag-return. Whilst preparing the JFK timeline xml data I discovered (after time-consuming investigation) that the existence of a <Cr> character in a property has considerable 'screw-things-up' potential. At best it simply breaks the property instance; at worst it cascades through any templates using it with unpredictable consequences. I guess it may be possible to physically prevent the use of a <Cr> character with a form field restriction but in any event I think 250 characters is probably enough (I haven't been tempted to use more yet anyway :-) - longer commentary can go in the 'Wikispooks Comment' section. The form IS currently restricted to 250 chacters (I think) --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 14:30, 3 January 2014 (GMT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::OK. I agree 500 characters (The [[False Flag Attack]] Description clinched it. That is 462 charcters. We still need to be careful about use of <Cr> though --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 15:19, 3 January 2014 (GMT) | ||
Revision as of 15:19, 3 January 2014
Expand Use
I think this would be good to expand on, to use for document summaries of perhaps 3-4 sentences each, to help people who are navigating around using the tables made by Template:RelatedDocuments and Template:SourcedDocuments. Robin (talk) 05:50, 21 December 2013 (GMT)
- I agree this is a useful property. It's site-enhancing potential is already quite apparent from the relatively few documents that have been u/graded to date. However, I think 500 Characters is too many; to big a temptation to include a Carriag-return. Whilst preparing the JFK timeline xml data I discovered (after time-consuming investigation) that the existence of a <Cr> character in a property has considerable 'screw-things-up' potential. At best it simply breaks the property instance; at worst it cascades through any templates using it with unpredictable consequences. I guess it may be possible to physically prevent the use of a <Cr> character with a form field restriction but in any event I think 250 characters is probably enough (I haven't been tempted to use more yet anyway :-) - longer commentary can go in the 'Wikispooks Comment' section. The form IS currently restricted to 250 chacters (I think) --Peter P (talk) 14:30, 3 January 2014 (GMT)
- OK. I agree 500 characters (The False Flag Attack Description clinched it. That is 462 charcters. We still need to be careful about use of <Cr> though --Peter P (talk) 15:19, 3 January 2014 (GMT)
