Should project and category pages adhere to style guidelines?

Question

About this time last year we had quite lengthy discussions on creative designs on profiles. The decision was made to strictly avoid advanced CSS and HTML styling on public and open profiles. More flexibility is allowed on private profiles and free-space profiles because they're not widely collaborative.

What about project pages? Should we maintain those same standards on the top-level primary project pages but allow more creativity on sub-projects and free-space projects?

What about category pages associated with projects? Should these maintain a more consistent style, without advanced CSS and HTML?

What are your thoughts? What feels like the best approach for the community?

Answer 1

Thanks for posting this, Abby. (We started to discuss this via e-mail, but this is something that the community should be invited to weigh-in on.)

My inclination is that CSS and HTML should avoided on categories and top-level project pages. It should be removed when we see it. Advanced styling is troublesome for all the reasons discussed here. If it's allowed on categories and high-level projects, people will assume that it's OK or even proper. Then it will end up on lots of categories and project pages.

On the other hand, I don't see any reason to police lower-level project pages, especially free-space projects. Those are small collaborations. Creativity and individuality can be good for projects. If some project members don't like it or it causes technical problems, it can easily be removed, as long as it's not used on lots of pages.

Comments

I think that you have the best idea on this one Chris.

Answer 2

I agree that Project pages and category pages should follow the Style guidelines used by the rest of wikitree. As Chris said, if it's seen on one of these, it will be assumed to be correct. One of the very first things that I did after the none CSS & HTML recommendations came out was to change the Profile Improvement Page, to comply with those guidelines.

I've actually never seen anything on a category page that was "fancy" anyway. (Although I've not looked at them all)

Comments

The main Holocaust category page may look "fancy" but what I did there uses ONLY elements on the approved/recommended/permitted/whatever lists.  I wanted that page to look more like a website page with graphics and buttons - it falls far short of what I would have liked, but I take great pride in what I managed to accomplish staying 100% within the rules.

By the way, I chose to use the category page instead of creating a separate free space page.  The main reason for this choice was the fact that category pages don't have a large portion of their width removed for all the stuff in the right column on profile and free space pages.  I wanted the full page width for page content and had no need for all the instructions, comments, photo displays, etc. that takes up valuable screen real estate and permits no editing control over what is there or where it is displayed.

Answer 3

I have used some "fancy" formatting on location category pages (see http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Rudolfov%2C_okres_%C4%8Cesk%C3%A9_Bud%C4%9Bjovice ). I did bring this up in G2G before doing it and started using it after nobody objected. Would that still be ok or is it now a no-no?

Comments

Helmut, I was delighted (and yes, a bit envious) when I saw your "fancy" formatting on the Rudolfov location Category pages! I admire your passion and believe you have created a work of art for the descendants of Rudolfov, hopefully it will be allowed.

Answer 4

Speaking for myself, and possibly other users, I personally am functionally computer illiterate. Can someone explain advanced CSS and HTML? Advanced can be relative depending on our individual  skills. For me, adding sources with footnotes and simple table is advanced.  I still haven't mastered using a repeated source. Saying that, I don't think I am in danger of getting "too fancy".

Could you give an example of something that is too fancy, or not in line with styles and standards?

Comments

Consistency throughout the site is a good idea.

---

Amy, I'd like to give you an example, but everytime I see one I correct it. But if it has things like <font></font>, <div style></div style>, <span style></span style> Those are non recommended. Recommended tags (< something></something> ) are here. When in doubt of course ask someone.

---

Thanks for the clarification Anne.

---

Thanks for the link Anne! I'd seen div style & thought it was wiki coding!

---

As an Wiki user/editor you should not have to use CSS or Html.

Complexity should be encapsulated in templates etc. ==>
You as an user just write {{MakeMyDay}} and that is expanded to some useful

Answer 5

I do not see a problem with it being used on categories that are created and being maintained by a project. Categories are not the same as a profile. They explain the purpose of the category while providing additional information.  The categories have already been collaborated.

Project pages, once again, are being used by the project leaders... if they are familiar with the advanced coding, there should not be a problem.  When leaders change, the project page should change and can be formated according to that Project Leaders desire. I'm not capable of doind advanced coding.. but since I collaborate: another person will do that. Perhaps that's a hidden benefit that could foster collaboration out of necessity.

Comments

Well said Terri! I completely agree with you.

---

Agree and then it would be nice on a category to see what projects work with that category