Board Thread:Watercooler/@comment-3032314-20181119015150/@comment-26402117-20181125182418

If the portability parser is tripedd in many pages or templates, our metrics for portability (as Vanguard) become visibly bad, which isn't a drastic issue so long as infoboxes are portable. But if it can be avoided, I recommend it. isn't so bad as a selector, when I think about it.

The metric essentially means "what proportion of this wiki's ns:0 pages consist solely of HTML output that Mercury can parse well?" It is used to flag issues and give attention to wikis whose article markup might be very very bad or entirely prohibitive.

However, the T module isn't so useful in the mainspace away from Dev Wiki :)

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying we should keep the inline CSS, since it's kinda-sorta semantic? Or do you mean that we should look for better HTML tags instead of using CSS at all? Absolutely, better HTML tags. Here's what I think you could use:


 * Wrapper is usually ''' property.
 * The template name and curly braces are key. They're critical information of the T invocation that are required to transclude the template. So   is fine.
 * The actual parameter list is an key-value list of associated items (in this case, parameter definitions). I would like   , but it seems that dl is a block element. So the    parameter wrappers are okay.
 * Within the parameter wrapper, I would use    and    to emphasise the varying stress and context of the parameter key & description. That also maintains the styling within FANDOM. It seems like   would be a better description choice, but it isn't styled on FANDOM as one would expect.

Here is what that looks like.