Let wel: Die datums van die Afrikaanse wikipedia ondergaan tans heelwat veranderings. Hier is skakels na twee weergawes van die dae in geskiedenis. Die skakels in die boonste weergawe wys na die artikels wat uiteindelik gebruik sal word. Werk asb dae in die ander twee formate by sodat ons kan standardiseer. Daar is afgespreek dat 1 Junie as templaat gebruik sal word.
----
Eksterne Engelse skakels
- [http://www.on-this-day.com/ on-this-day.com]
- [http://www.historychannel.com/today/ The history channel: this day in history]
- [http://www.todayinsci.com/ Today in science]
Kategorie:Lysja:365日ko:366일
Hierdie bladsy word gebruik om die bladsy uitleg van jare te bespreek.
Can we stick to ccffcc throughout?
----
The left aligned table doesn't work for me. Do you think we should have decades at all? How about links to other years and centuries on year pages, links to other centuries and millennia on century pages, extending the eeue page to a more far-reaching timeline page (big bang to heat death), links to other millennia and the time line on the millenmium pages?
We do not need decades, except maybe in the years 1000-500 BC where they are handy, because the data (archeological e.g.) gets inprecise. A smooth transition from geological to archeological to historical timescales would be great but is not so easy to organize because the error margins also change. A general timeline page would be nice but may become pretty complicated and not easily accessible for people with different backgrounds that are used to their own way of dating
We should move away from tables for layout: tables for tabled data, CSS for layout.
I don not know what you mean with CSS and I also do not see what is wrong with tables. They are one of the most powerful aspects of the software as far as I can tell
:[http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets Cascading style sheets] are used for presentation, tables for content structure.
I'm thinking white tables if the data has to do with the article, and colored (not meta yellow) CSS boxes to link to other prev/next articles (in ccffcc?).
I find white tables rather makeshift looking, unless the content makes that different, see e.g the hieroglyph page on nl.wiki.
:Okay. The color display is limited on the computer I'm editing on now, so choosing the colors are up to you — just don't use colors too close to the meta yellow).
::I put the navigation block down below again because the 'globe' on the left upper corner disrupts the alignement
I don't like the "Eeue, Geskiedenis, Dae" bullets. The link to "Eeue" is already on all the century pages, "Geskiedenis" on the homepage, and "Hierdie dag in die geskiedenis" on all the day pages. Reformat, remove, keep?
I don;t really see the problem with a few links more: it simply facilitates easier navigation. Most other language wiki's have the Eeue link in one form or another, even the german one that is otherwise pretty parsimonous. (Only one year on each side e.g.). I'd say keep. I've made it less prominent though.
Consider the visual (CSS needs to be optimized) navigation suggestion at [http://jack.p5.org.uk/nav.html] for when af: renders the span tag and offers
Kategorie:21ste eeuals:2001ja:2001年ko:2001년ms:2001simple:2001th:พ.ศ. 2544zh-min-nan:2001 nî
