Template talk:Routelist bottom
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Happy5214 in topic Color keys?
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Color keys?
editIt appears this template does not allow to add the color keys that are available with {{jctbtm}}. It might be worth looking at adding those here, to provide a legend for the colors that might later be requested at a FL or similar review. I can see two, maybe three uses: gray (former), orange (proposed/under construction), purple (completely tolled highway). The footer need not display if there's no key called. Thoughts? -- LJ ↗ 22:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed, and I think it's in the works... I hadn't thought of the purple, but that makes sense. It would need to be added to the other templates since only gray and orange are currently in use. Imzadi 1979 → 00:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- I have been meaning to add this, but have gotten distracted by other things (the planned addition of these keys are why this template exists instead of just doing a manual table-end). I think we can get away with not using a keys parameter and just displaying all of the keys, since nearly every state has at least one former highway, and many have at least one future highway. As for a toll color, that will need to be discussed and added to the standard before we contemplate adding it to the template. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 00:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- I disagree on one point: List of U.S. Highways in Michigan. There are no future U.S. Highways in the state. I also slightly disagree on another: List of Interstate Highways in Michigan has tables without a former Interstate, but in those cases the template could be bypassed with
|}. I think we'll need to have options to turn the keys on as needed. Imzadi 1979 → 00:53, 30 March 2014 (UTC)- I understand that all keys won't necessarily apply to all lists. What I was wondering was more along the lines of, with only three keys, is it really that much of a problem to have unused keys displaying? I am not really in favor of one approach or another, but if we do require a keys= parameter, we would need to run through the lists using the template and add the keys parameter. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 06:18, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- Once upon a time, we had four keys displaying by default on the bottom of every junction/exit list table using colors. If that were still the case, I would say it wouldn't be a big deal to display unused keys at the bottom of these lists, but since we no turn on only the needed keys, I think these lists should do the same. Imzadi 1979 → 08:58, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- I understand that all keys won't necessarily apply to all lists. What I was wondering was more along the lines of, with only three keys, is it really that much of a problem to have unused keys displaying? I am not really in favor of one approach or another, but if we do require a keys= parameter, we would need to run through the lists using the template and add the keys parameter. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 06:18, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- I disagree on one point: List of U.S. Highways in Michigan. There are no future U.S. Highways in the state. I also slightly disagree on another: List of Interstate Highways in Michigan has tables without a former Interstate, but in those cases the template could be bypassed with
- I have been meaning to add this, but have gotten distracted by other things (the planned addition of these keys are why this template exists instead of just doing a manual table-end). I think we can get away with not using a keys parameter and just displaying all of the keys, since nearly every state has at least one former highway, and many have at least one future highway. As for a toll color, that will need to be discussed and added to the standard before we contemplate adding it to the template. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 00:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Finally 
Done! -happy5214 07:12, 11 May 2014 (UTC)