On 3/17/08, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There is very little consensus about people making a
point of having
categories or interwiki links in a specific order or in separate parts
of the document. What ordered metadata can you describe, other than
the example with the comment that is used solely for ease of freetext
editing and could be better defined in a permanent section on the
discussion page? Unless there is any actual reason for wanting to have
one category declared between a template and something else, when
infact the position of declaration is completely meaningless, it seems
like a distraction to talk about it being a lack of consensus.
I'm primarily talking about the crucial issue of whether interwiki
links come before categories or after them. This matters a *lot*. To
some people. It's one of those sort of irrational situations we have
where X is ok, Y is ok, but changing X to Y is not ok. British English
is ok. American English is ok. Converting British to American English
is not ok. Interwikis then categories is ok. Cats then interwikis is
ok. Moving interwikis before categories is not ok.
The issue of the ordering of categories themselves is probably best
solved by not reordering. Since category ordering affects the visual
presentation, it's not really safe to just arbitrarily reorder them.
Still don't quite see what your point is with two
interleaved list
boxes to accommodate a preference to define categories in a
meaningless order. As far as the rest is concerned, it would be nice
The interleaved example is probably contrived. I don't think the free
variation of order can be just ignored though. As Ian found out.
Steve