Template talk:Metadata2: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>J. Noel Chiappa (Displaying subgroup fields) |
imported>Chris Day No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I see there's a #if on the subgroup fields display. Interesting idea, but why only on those fields? Or, put it the other way, if no other fields have it, why should these? Why not always print all fields, or only print non-blank fields? [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 12:27, 22 April 2008 (CDT) | I see there's a #if on the subgroup fields display. Interesting idea, but why only on those fields? Or, put it the other way, if no other fields have it, why should these? Why not always print all fields, or only print non-blank fields? [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 12:27, 22 April 2008 (CDT) | ||
:I did that at the time since there was no solid consensus on the status of subworkgroups. I'd say they are going ahead so we can have them as default. An #if on the new tab fields might be useful though or should we just have everything transparent? By the way how many tab fields should we add? I added three to start with but maybe more? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 12:31, 22 April 2008 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 11:31, 22 April 2008
Displaying subgroup fields
I see there's a #if on the subgroup fields display. Interesting idea, but why only on those fields? Or, put it the other way, if no other fields have it, why should these? Why not always print all fields, or only print non-blank fields? J. Noel Chiappa 12:27, 22 April 2008 (CDT)
- I did that at the time since there was no solid consensus on the status of subworkgroups. I'd say they are going ahead so we can have them as default. An #if on the new tab fields might be useful though or should we just have everything transparent? By the way how many tab fields should we add? I added three to start with but maybe more? Chris Day 12:31, 22 April 2008 (CDT)