Template talk:Skill box qr

If no one has anything against it, I will change the black background to white as it looks much better that way. The light grey should also be replaced with a nicer colour, but I don't know which. --Gem 06:40, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
 * What about the green we use? Grey doesn't look too nice Skuld  07:23, 3 May 2006 (CDT)

Upkeep wraps


Skuld  07:28, 3 May 2006 (CDT)

Please stop editing this template for now
I am trying to debug my robot and it's hard if it keeps thinking that there are edit conflicts.

We can fix design isssues after the robot is done. &mdash; Stabber &#x270d; 07:46, 3 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Err, appears the edit conflict came from a bug in my code. Sorry, carry on. &mdash; Stabber &#x270d; 07:48, 3 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Sorry for editing even if the error wasn't my fault. :) --Gem [[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] 07:49, 3 May 2006 (CDT)

Questable
The questable box is very ugly for most factions skills, since the great majority can only be bought. Wouldn't it look better without the border (like the stat row)? --Theeth (talk)   10:28, 29 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I don't see a reason to change it. It looks good to me, even if there is no icon present. And remember that in most quick references there are skills from both campaigns. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 11:59, 29 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Agreed. &mdash; Galil  12:37, 29 August 2006 (CDT) Uggh, these database lockups are killing me. >.>

Now the same thing is happening with the new duplicate box. If you look at Monk skills quick reference, since the size of those cells isn't fixed, the tables with duplicates skills look different than the ones without (Healing vs Protection). I still think it would look much better if the borders separating questable, dups and campaign were dropped. --Theeth (talk)   12:12, 31 August 2006 (CDT)

Lock
I hereby suggest a lock on this template. The wiki's performance depends on it. Edits in this template locks the wiki for 10-20 minutes, as it loops through all templates using this (that is, all skill templates, and each and every quick reference) to tell them this has been changed and that those should update the cache. Also, this happens while visitors are trying to browse around the wiki which isn't exactly optimal while editing this. &mdash; Galil  11:45, 31 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I hereby agree. --Theeth (talk)   11:53, 31 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Done &mdash; Skuld 12:08, 31 August 2006 (CDT)

Echo type
I think the if in this template is a better solution than ugliness in the skill data templates. --Fyren 12:13, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Possibly, but I thought the reason we split it to begin with was to split data and styling. Also, what if more types require a pipe? Should we add those to this template as well? I personally believe the ugliness in the skill templates themselves is a better solution than clogging up other templates with skill data. &mdash; Galil  16:30, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * The skill box templates are already opaque to most people, so I'd rather keep all "oddness" inside them than in their parameters. The skill data, at least, can be easy to understand, so I'd rather people see this than this (besides maybe the progression parameters, at least unless I can come up with simpler names).  --Fyren 17:23, 31 August 2006 (CDT)

Cell sizes
Could someone edit the template and set the quest icon cell width to 29 pixels and the duplicate icon cell to 42 pixels. Now the quick references have different cell sizes depending on the usage of the icons in an attribute line. It should always be the same. -- (talk) 16:43, 7 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Done &mdash; Skuld 16:59, 7 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Yeah, good job on that. Could we never edit these templates without testing changes elsewhere first?  --Fyren 17:16, 7 September 2006 (CDT)
 * You screwed it Skuld. :( I didn't mean the icon size, but the cell size. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 17:48, 7 September 2006 (CDT)