From Citizendium
< Talk:Geometry
Revision as of 20:39, 27 May 2008 by J. Noel Chiappa (Talk | contribs) (Format of definition: Ah, now I see - can fix)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Format of definition

Should the definition be in italics or in plain text? Should the double apostrophes in the template be left or removed? The instructions in the template should answer this. Thanks, ... Peter Lyall Easthope 10:25, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

Doesn't it reference CZ:Definition? Oh well. There are quite a few templates that use the /Definition subpage, and we wouldn't want to duplicate the documentation on all of them. Wouldn't hurt to link to CZ:Definition, though. If that page doesn't answer these questions (italics, etc) it should be modified to do so. J. Noel Chiappa 16:48, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

jnc> Doesn't it reference CZ:Definition?
Yes but I was reading the template which is source text which isn't a live link. After skipping around, found that submitting "Geometry/Definition" in the search field gets the definition.
jnc> If [CZ:Definition] page doesn't answer these questions ...
Not mentioned that I can see. In any case, what is the benefit of the double apostrophes in the template? Thanks, ... Peter Lyall Easthope 22:26, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

Sorry, which template is this? You mean {{R}}? It doesn't include any italic markup, as far as I can see. J. Noel Chiappa 07:20, 25 May 2008 (CDT)

Noel, please go to the Kinematics article and open the Related Articles link. In Related Articles, Chronometry lacks a definition. Click on the link "Add brief definition". A template with text enclosed in double apostrophes will open. If the definition is not meant to be italicized, the double apostrophes should be omitted from the template.
Regards ... Peter Lyall Easthope 10:29, 26 May 2008 (CDT)

Ah, now I see what you're talking about. I will fix that. J. Noel Chiappa 15:39, 27 May 2008 (CDT)