User talk:McClaw - Revision history

JarlPenguin: oops

2020-04-09T11:16:24Z

oops

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:16, 9 April 2020
Line 93:		Line 93:
	== Main Page cleanup ==		== Main Page cleanup ==

	Could you add the following benches to the "Crafting Surfaces" section: Electric Press, Electric Sluice, Refinery, Compost Bin? Also, please put the Builder's Bench between the Armor Bench and the Campfire, so as to have it in an alphabetically correct place. Please revise the 1.7.6 release date for Android to 2019-07-30. Thanks -[[User:JarlPenguin\|JarlPenguin]] ([[User talk:JarlPenguin\|talk]]) 11:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)		Could you add the following benches to the "Crafting Surfaces" section: Electric Press, Electric Sluice, Refinery, Compost Bin? Also, please put the Builder's Bench between the Armor Bench and the Campfire, so as to have it in an alphabetically correct place. Please revise the 1.7.4 release date for Android to 2019-02-06. Thanks -[[User:JarlPenguin\|JarlPenguin]] ([[User talk:JarlPenguin\|talk]]) 11:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

JarlPenguin: /* Main Page cleanup */ new section

2020-04-09T11:14:15Z

Main Page cleanup: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:14, 9 April 2020
Line 90:		Line 90:
	::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)		::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)
	:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions or a rainbow gradient, but might still stand as animated GIFs. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions or a rainbow gradient, but might still stand as animated GIFs. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)

			== Main Page cleanup ==

			Could you add the following benches to the "Crafting Surfaces" section: Electric Press, Electric Sluice, Refinery, Compost Bin? Also, please put the Builder's Bench between the Armor Bench and the Campfire, so as to have it in an alphabetically correct place. Please revise the 1.7.6 release date for Android to 2019-07-30. Thanks -[[User:JarlPenguin\|JarlPenguin]] ([[User talk:JarlPenguin\|talk]]) 11:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

>Quest130: /* Death */

2014-12-07T22:35:28Z

Death

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:35, 7 December 2014
Line 35:		Line 35:
	:Repeated information shouldn't be a big problem, so long as it isn't excessive. Better a short paragraph than having to move to a new page for something simple. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:04, 5 April 2014 (MDT)		:Repeated information shouldn't be a big problem, so long as it isn't excessive. Better a short paragraph than having to move to a new page for something simple. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:04, 5 April 2014 (MDT)
	::Okay. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:26, 5 April 2014 (MDT)		::Okay. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:26, 5 April 2014 (MDT)
			:::Who put death star? [[User:Quest130\|Quest130]] ([[User talk:Quest130\|talk]]) 15:35, 7 December 2014 (MST)

	==Japanese wiki==		==Japanese wiki==

>McClaw: /* Animated images */

2014-11-30T18:16:06Z

Animated images

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:16, 30 November 2014
Line 88:		Line 88:
	:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)
	::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)		::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)
	:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions, or a rainbow gradient. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions or a rainbow gradient, but might still stand as animated GIFs. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)

>McClaw: /* Animated images */

2014-11-30T18:15:22Z

Animated images

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:15, 30 November 2014
Line 88:		Line 88:
	:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)
	::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)		::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)
			:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions, or a rainbow gradient. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)

>Abcboy: /* Animated images */

2014-11-30T17:51:06Z

Animated images

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:51, 30 November 2014
Line 87:		Line 87:
	GIF files support only 256 colors, don't support partial transparency, but are supported on almost any browser. APNG files support all colors and partial transparency, but aren't supported in Chrome, IE, or Safari 7 and older. MNG files aren't supported by anybody. Partial transparency lets us display images on any background, as shown to the right. What should we do? Should we keep trying to use GIF even with the loss of quality? --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 12:39, 29 November 2014 (MST)		GIF files support only 256 colors, don't support partial transparency, but are supported on almost any browser. APNG files support all colors and partial transparency, but aren't supported in Chrome, IE, or Safari 7 and older. MNG files aren't supported by anybody. Partial transparency lets us display images on any background, as shown to the right. What should we do? Should we keep trying to use GIF even with the loss of quality? --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 12:39, 29 November 2014 (MST)
	:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)
			::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)

>McClaw: /* Animated images */

2014-11-30T16:57:15Z

Animated images

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:57, 30 November 2014
Line 84:		Line 84:

	== Animated images ==		== Animated images ==

	<div style="float:right;margin:5px;background:#f0f;">[[File:Platinum Coin Big.png]]</div>		<div style="float:right;margin:5px;background:#f0f;">[[File:Platinum Coin Big.png]]</div>
	GIF files support only 256 colors, don't support partial transparency, but are supported on almost any browser. APNG files support all colors and partial transparency, but aren't supported in Chrome, IE, or Safari 7 and older. MNG files aren't supported by anybody. Partial transparency lets us display images on any background, as shown to the right. What should we do? Should we keep trying to use GIF even with the loss of quality? --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 12:39, 29 November 2014 (MST)		GIF files support only 256 colors, don't support partial transparency, but are supported on almost any browser. APNG files support all colors and partial transparency, but aren't supported in Chrome, IE, or Safari 7 and older. MNG files aren't supported by anybody. Partial transparency lets us display images on any background, as shown to the right. What should we do? Should we keep trying to use GIF even with the loss of quality? --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 12:39, 29 November 2014 (MST)
			:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)

>Abcboy: /* Animated images */ new section

2014-11-29T19:39:52Z

Animated images: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:39, 29 November 2014
Line 82:		Line 82:
	::Also, what would you think of a template that makes it easier to link to Wikipedia, something like <code><nowiki>{{wp\|Apple}}</nowiki></code>? It could be used in pages so we don't have to keep typing a link manually each time. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:18, 29 August 2014 (MDT)		::Also, what would you think of a template that makes it easier to link to Wikipedia, something like <code><nowiki>{{wp\|Apple}}</nowiki></code>? It could be used in pages so we don't have to keep typing a link manually each time. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:18, 29 August 2014 (MDT)
	:::There are arguments both ways for plural/singular, and as I said I have no preference so long as we're consistent and try to make a simple distinction between them. A Wikipedia-link template would be helpful for those rare times it's needed; keeping track of its use would be a good idea if it's implemented. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:38, 30 August 2014 (MDT)		:::There are arguments both ways for plural/singular, and as I said I have no preference so long as we're consistent and try to make a simple distinction between them. A Wikipedia-link template would be helpful for those rare times it's needed; keeping track of its use would be a good idea if it's implemented. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:38, 30 August 2014 (MDT)

			== Animated images ==

			<div style="float:right;margin:5px;background:#f0f;">[[File:Platinum Coin Big.png]]</div>
			GIF files support only 256 colors, don't support partial transparency, but are supported on almost any browser. APNG files support all colors and partial transparency, but aren't supported in Chrome, IE, or Safari 7 and older. MNG files aren't supported by anybody. Partial transparency lets us display images on any background, as shown to the right. What should we do? Should we keep trying to use GIF even with the loss of quality? --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 12:39, 29 November 2014 (MST)

>McClaw: /* Changing plural in categories/page titles */

2014-08-30T15:38:39Z

Changing plural in categories/page titles

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:38, 30 August 2014
Line 81:		Line 81:
	::Most things are already in the singular, such as all the items. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(plurals) (What Wikipedia does)] I prefer categories to in the plural, because the category of items contains items. Some things shouldn't be changed, like Category:Rail, a category of rail-related things. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization#Category_tree_organization Or as Wikipedia calls it, topic and set categories.]		::Most things are already in the singular, such as all the items. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(plurals) (What Wikipedia does)] I prefer categories to in the plural, because the category of items contains items. Some things shouldn't be changed, like Category:Rail, a category of rail-related things. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization#Category_tree_organization Or as Wikipedia calls it, topic and set categories.]
	::Also, what would you think of a template that makes it easier to link to Wikipedia, something like <code><nowiki>{{wp\|Apple}}</nowiki></code>? It could be used in pages so we don't have to keep typing a link manually each time. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:18, 29 August 2014 (MDT)		::Also, what would you think of a template that makes it easier to link to Wikipedia, something like <code><nowiki>{{wp\|Apple}}</nowiki></code>? It could be used in pages so we don't have to keep typing a link manually each time. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:18, 29 August 2014 (MDT)
			:::There are arguments both ways for plural/singular, and as I said I have no preference so long as we're consistent and try to make a simple distinction between them. A Wikipedia-link template would be helpful for those rare times it's needed; keeping track of its use would be a good idea if it's implemented. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:38, 30 August 2014 (MDT)

>Abcboy: /* Changing plural in categories/page titles */

2014-08-29T16:18:43Z

Changing plural in categories/page titles

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:18, 29 August 2014
Line 79:		Line 79:

	:I have no objections to either way of doing it, so long as we keep it consistent. I will observe, though, that the "Items" page is mostly a list of items and the "Item" category is applied to individual item pages. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 08:00, 29 August 2014 (MDT)		:I have no objections to either way of doing it, so long as we keep it consistent. I will observe, though, that the "Items" page is mostly a list of items and the "Item" category is applied to individual item pages. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 08:00, 29 August 2014 (MDT)
			::Most things are already in the singular, such as all the items. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(plurals) (What Wikipedia does)] I prefer categories to in the plural, because the category of items contains items. Some things shouldn't be changed, like Category:Rail, a category of rail-related things. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization#Category_tree_organization Or as Wikipedia calls it, topic and set categories.]
			::Also, what would you think of a template that makes it easier to link to Wikipedia, something like <code><nowiki>{{wp\|Apple}}</nowiki></code>? It could be used in pages so we don't have to keep typing a link manually each time. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:18, 29 August 2014 (MDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:16, 30 November 2014
Line 88:		Line 88:
	:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)
	::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)		::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)
	:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions, or a rainbow gradient. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions or a rainbow gradient, but might still stand as animated GIFs. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:15, 30 November 2014
Line 88:		Line 88:
	:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)
	::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)		::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)
			:::Considering the items we've done animated images for aren't things that can be placed on blocks or back walls, I agree about the collage idea for main images. The icons might work better with white blank space as "generic" versions, or a rainbow gradient. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 11:15, 30 November 2014 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:51, 30 November 2014
Line 87:		Line 87:
	GIF files support only 256 colors, don't support partial transparency, but are supported on almost any browser. APNG files support all colors and partial transparency, but aren't supported in Chrome, IE, or Safari 7 and older. MNG files aren't supported by anybody. Partial transparency lets us display images on any background, as shown to the right. What should we do? Should we keep trying to use GIF even with the loss of quality? --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 12:39, 29 November 2014 (MST)		GIF files support only 256 colors, don't support partial transparency, but are supported on almost any browser. APNG files support all colors and partial transparency, but aren't supported in Chrome, IE, or Safari 7 and older. MNG files aren't supported by anybody. Partial transparency lets us display images on any background, as shown to the right. What should we do? Should we keep trying to use GIF even with the loss of quality? --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 12:39, 29 November 2014 (MST)
	:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)		:First, I suggest creating a category for animated images and tagging those so they're all in one place. Second, I believe all our animated images are done to conserve space by cycling through tools made with multiple materials. We could create static generic versions (blank black/white? rainbow?), place multiple images, or continue using animated images with associated loss of background and possible quality. Your conversion to a standard background is nice, but could be a problem with images that don't contrast enough. sigh I'd say convert to generic/silhouette images in PNG and make sure all versions are given as examples elsewhere in the article. --[[User:McClaw\|McClaw]] ([[User talk:McClaw\|talk]]) 09:57, 30 November 2014 (MST)
			::The new standard background is a transparent color. The Item Infobox pages have a gradient applied so that the transparency shows through to the gradient. The reason partial transparency is good is so images like raw resin and epoxy can be displayed correctly instead of on a white background. It also might just be better to make the main image a collage of all of the types. --[[User:Abcboy\|Abcboy]] ([[User talk:Abcboy\|talk]]) 10:51, 30 November 2014 (MST)