Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→Table: another thought) |
m (agree) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::I think a three-column table layout (Name, Image, Price), with the two tables following each other on the page, is probably better than the current side-by-side one. If nothing else, it'd maintain more consistency with the other list pages (Fish, bugs etc.). --[[User:Aniki21|aniki21]] ([[User talk:Aniki21|talk]]) 14:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC) | ::I think a three-column table layout (Name, Image, Price), with the two tables following each other on the page, is probably better than the current side-by-side one. If nothing else, it'd maintain more consistency with the other list pages (Fish, bugs etc.). --[[User:Aniki21|aniki21]] ([[User talk:Aniki21|talk]]) 14:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
::You could even have a fourth column for Size (small/large) and combine both into the one table? --[[User:Aniki21|aniki21]] ([[User talk:Aniki21|talk]]) 14:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC) | ::You could even have a fourth column for Size (small/large) and combine both into the one table? --[[User:Aniki21|aniki21]] ([[User talk:Aniki21|talk]]) 14:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
:The small/large thing is a bit confusing. The fossils listed as small are simply single items, while the large fossils are pieces of full creatures - usually 3 or 4 parts to make a whole dinosaur. I'm not convinced that separate tables are required at all and would be happy to return to a Name, Image, Price layout as Aniki mentioned. It would be more in-keeping with the other lists.--[[User:Minx|Minx]] ([[User talk:Minx|talk]]) 15:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:38, 21 August 2013
Table
I'm not sure I like the tables on this page. They are long and narrow which means lots of scrolling and lots of white space. Any thoughts on alternative layouts? --Minx (talk) 13:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- How about it now? I've arrange to put it in 2 column. You could also split up the second table and arrange it in 3 column instead of 2? Paco (talk) 14:12, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think a three-column table layout (Name, Image, Price), with the two tables following each other on the page, is probably better than the current side-by-side one. If nothing else, it'd maintain more consistency with the other list pages (Fish, bugs etc.). --aniki21 (talk) 14:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- You could even have a fourth column for Size (small/large) and combine both into the one table? --aniki21 (talk) 14:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- The small/large thing is a bit confusing. The fossils listed as small are simply single items, while the large fossils are pieces of full creatures - usually 3 or 4 parts to make a whole dinosaur. I'm not convinced that separate tables are required at all and would be happy to return to a Name, Image, Price layout as Aniki mentioned. It would be more in-keeping with the other lists.--Minx (talk) 15:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)