Talk:Druid (Evaluational Base Class Layout)/L4s
From D&D Wiki
So early on with this, there was an issue with the visual layout of the headers in that the font size for the L4s weren't small enough to distinguish them from L3s through just casual scanning. (Additionally, I've had the same problem with L4s and L5s.) So all the L4s were bumped up to L3s, the L3s bumped up to L2s, and the L2s bumped up to L1s.
There are three problems with this:
- L4s are effectively useless. For the reasons expressed above, they would be omitted from all pages, not just the class pages.
- The way L1s are used goes against Wikipedia's Manual of Style.
- Without the L4s, we're limited to only five levels of headers, and for the most part we try to mimic the layout in WotC sourcebooks. However, their headers have six different levels (Chapter 10: Magic in the PHB is a good example of all six levels):
- Chapter titles: "Chapter 10: Magic."
- "Casting Spells," "Spell Descriptions," "Arcane Spells," "Divine Spells," and "Special Abilities." Also, each class starts with this header.
- Under Spell Descriptions, "Name," "School (Subschool)," "[Descriptor]," "Level," etc. Each skill and each feat use this header.
- Under School (Subschool), "Abjuration," "Conjuration," "Divination," "Evocation," etc. This is the level for the "Class Features" header.
- Under Conjuration, "Calling," "Creation," "Healing," "Summoning," and "Teleportation." Each individual class feature uses this header except subsets of class features (see next header).
- Under Aiming a Spell > Effect, "Ray" and "Spread." All the sub-features under the rogue's "Special Abilities" class feature use this header.
My solution is to change the CSS so that the L4s can be distinguished from the L3s and L5s through casual scanning of the page, and knock all the L1s, L2s, and L3s back down again to L2s, L3s, and L4s. Change L4s to use the same font as L3s now use, change L3s to look like L2s, L2s to L1s, and have the font-size of L1s increased just enough to differentiate them from what the new L2s. I feel that now's to time to address this, otherwise we run the risk of having to change all the class pages all over again.
The change will help the site both adhere to wikipedia standards and mirror the layout of WotC sourcebooks without compromising the visual effects for which we're aiming. —Sledged (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2007 (MDT)
- While I don't think that Wikipedia should be the bible of how to write a wiki, I think you make good points. I agree that we should change the CSS, but as someone said elsewhere, local formatting is ugly while styles are elegant. I think we should check them after the change to see that they're visually distinguishable as well as visually appealing.
- Not knowing enough about CSS and such, I don't know if this will have any other resounding effects on other pages, but I think we should check for that too if possible. --Armond (talk/contribs) 11:50, 23 May 2007 (MDT)
- I agree that eliminating a level of headers is unacceptable, and using L1's indiscriminately instead of L2's is also unacceptable. However, I don't like the idea of making L3's look like L2's, in that it would make it too difficult to distinguish major sections. –Cúthalion (talk) 11:54, 23 May 2007 (MDT)
- However, I wasn't thinking so much of visual distinction as conceptual. An L2 visually sets off three or four (or whatever) major sections of a page. If L3's have the same visual characteristics, it tells the reader this page has (potentially) dozens of major sections, at once overwhelming the senses and diluting the effect of the L2's.
- Of course, I'm saying all this off the cuff and hypothetically. I haven't seen pages where this is actually practiced, nor read any commentaries of it.
- Incidentally, I don't always obey the L1 dictum on WikiRPS. I'll sometimes use L1's to denote major divisions, as an alternative to breaking a page into multiple pages. For instance, when multiple rule variants are available, I'll make each one an L1. I've also been using an L1 to set off examples, and to set off the page lists at the end of a category page. I'm not certain this is the best way to do things, but I think I like the effect so far. See, for example, Character points and Category:Skill.
Alternative suggestion: Use the default formatting for all the headers, except make L4 italic. This makes L4 easy to distinguish from both L3 & L5, without causing undue confustion. See L4s/Italic.
- Italic L4s is visually appealing and distinguishable. I'd have to see an example of 1px less to really make a decision on it, if you can do that. --Armond (talk/contribs) 09:04, 24 May 2007 (MDT)