Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Template talk:rel-top. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Template talk:rel-top, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Template talk:rel-top in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Template talk:rel-top you have here. The definition of the word Template talk:rel-top will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTemplate talk:rel-top, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Discussion
Interface
This could use some improvement.
The way it is now, the reader sees a subheading “Derived terms”, and below it is a grey box containing bold sub-subheading text, “Derived terms”. If their window is wide, then the actual interface “” is far removed. This is redundant and somewhat opaque.
Instead of redundant headings, why not make the main heading the interface? Why surround it with a box at all? And why have a separate widget – as long as there is an indication of collapsed state, the entire heading could expand/collapse with a click. —MichaelZ. 2009-05-06 15:48 z
Not working for me outside N0
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
In fact, it doesn't work for me on its documentation page. It does seem to work in principal namespace. Has someone decided that is shouldn't be used outside of N0? Can that person be shot or exiled? DCDuringTALK02:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
Hi, now that we got the {{der3}} and {{rel3}} working on the mobile frontend I suggest we retire the box-templates for derived and related terms that is not supported by a majority of users according to the vote in BP in 2018. If we need a new vote, please state so and I will create a proper one.
This does need a vote, because the BP discussion wasn't about getting rid of these templates. I would be against, because these templates have capabilities that {{col3}} and its sisters don't (nested lists for instance), and it's good to keep histories readable. — Eru·tuon22:30, 14 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Oh, I had not thought about historyreadablility. Could you give an example of a nested list - I don't think I encountered one yet?--So9q (talk) 22:33, 14 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
A nested list: σέβομαι(sébomai). Another thing, lists with interspersed headings: λύω(lúō), πλέω(pléō). Though they don't all look great, they convey extra information that a simple list of links does not. Perhaps there wouldn't be loss of information from the ones with interspersed headings if they were converted to {{col3}} by splitting them into separate lists with a header (|title=), but I kind of like the more compact format. — Eru·tuon06:36, 15 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Currently, {{der-top}} and {{der-bottom}} is being used in Han character entries for Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese compounds, so it is not possible to delete these two templates. The reason for using {{der-top}} is because {{der3}} consumes Lua memory whereas {{der-top}} does not. See CAT:E for Han character entries that have already exceeded default Lua memory despite using {{der-top}}.
Actually, I think the benefit of the top, mid, bottom templates in some of the Han character entries is that you can put anything inside them, including a linking template that invokes Lua only once (for instance, {{ja-r/multi}} in 月#Japanese). But they may be less memory-efficient than {{col3}} if they contain many instances of templates that invoke Lua (for instance, {{ko-l}} in 學#Korean). In general the fewer Lua invocations, the less memory. — Eru·tuon20:30, 15 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the clarification. I didn't realize {{der-top}} could be less memory-efficient if it contains a large number of Lua-invoking templates. When I tried to use {{der3}} instead of {{der-top}} for 學#Korean I found that {{der-top}} used 4.04 MB compared to 4.49MB used by {{der3}}. Since it is possible to further reduce memory for {{der-top}} by using linking templates such as {{ja-r/multi}}, it would not be wise to delete {{der-top}} and {{der-bottom}}.
If I understood correctly we are now ready to vote about deleting {{der-mid}}, {{rel-top}}, {{rel-mid}} and {{rel-bottom}}. Additionally I would like to get rid of {{rel-top3}} and {{rel-top4}}. {{rel-top}} and {{rel-top3}} is used in about 4000 pages that will need to be (bot) edited and converted to e.g. col3 when there are more than a few terms. Anyone against deleting any of these?--So9q (talk) 11:18, 9 October 2019 (UTC)Reply
Strong keep - we should deprecate templates which have been heavily used in the past rather than deleting them. It is very inconvenient when viewing a historical version of a page if you can't see any of the content because the previous version had used old templates. If we want to prevent people from using a certain template going forward we can orphan it and then add an abuse filter which prevents it from being added back. - TheDaveRoss12:16, 9 October 2019 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for chiming in. I agree with the deprecation in favor of deletion argument. The argument of Donnanz about col3 being ugly has already been voiced during the vote mentioned above.
{{rel-mid}} and {{der-mid}} were necessary once, but are now redundant. I remove them when I come across them without any ill effects. So they probably can be deleted, but keep the others. DonnanZ (talk) 09:18, 10 October 2019 (UTC)Reply
