Difference between revisions of "Template talk:RecordSearch"

From FamilySearch Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Name of this template)
 
(Add comment)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Name of this template ==
+
== Name of this template ==
  
 
[[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]] raised the question about the name of this template in a [http://forums.familysearchsupport.com/showpost.php?p=3014&postcount=6 forum post]. His suggestion was {{tl|RecordSearch}}. I would not object to a name change, but I think the reason I choose {{tl|CID}} still holds.  
 
[[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]] raised the question about the name of this template in a [http://forums.familysearchsupport.com/showpost.php?p=3014&postcount=6 forum post]. His suggestion was {{tl|RecordSearch}}. I would not object to a name change, but I think the reason I choose {{tl|CID}} still holds.  
  
Firstly I noticed that [[User:Horandm|Horandm]] was creating article for various record search collections, such as [[England Cheshire Nonconformist Church Records]] and including at the bottom of the article a line of code that included a CID ref. [[User_talk:Horandm#CID identification numbers|Why this is being done and why the coding is in a particular format is still unclear to me]].  
+
Firstly I noticed that [[User:Horandm|Horandm]] was creating article for various record search collections, such as [[England Cheshire Nonconformist Church Records]] and including at the bottom of the article a line of code that included a CID ref. [[User talk:Horandm#CID_identification_numbers|Why this is being done and why the coding is in a particular format is still unclear to me]].  
  
 
I also coded the template to include an optional ''display text'' parameter, but if that is not given the default display is  
 
I also coded the template to include an optional ''display text'' parameter, but if that is not given the default display is  
 +
 
:''CID #######''
 
:''CID #######''
  
Finally, when coding an article, templates with short titles are easier to type. --[[User:CottrellS|Steve]] 20:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
+
Finally, when coding an article, templates with short titles are easier to type. --[[User:CottrellS|Steve]] 20:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 +
 
 +
:Although I would agree that short titles are easier to type, I believe this may be a mistake. CID appears to be the name of the ID used in the URL to identify which collection is being used within the Record Search product (although it is still considered a pilot product at this time). To me, using this name to reference something within Record Search is not very intuitive nor user friendly . . . maybe even a bit geeky (I resemble that remark, by the way). Being not intuitive, I believe it will be harder for people to remember. It would be similar to referring to a record contained in Ancestry as {{tl|dbid}} since that is the database identifier they use in their URL. Similarly, the IGI uses recid and the new FamilySearch uses bookid. If a template was created for these (very unlikely), I would be opposed to them be called {{tl|recid}} and {{tl|bookid}} respectively. It would make more sense to me to use the actual source name rather than an identifier that is used for internal purposes. [[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]] 00:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:58, 13 August 2009

Name of this template

Thomas Lerman raised the question about the name of this template in a forum post. His suggestion was {{RecordSearch}}. I would not object to a name change, but I think the reason I choose {{CID}} still holds.

Firstly I noticed that Horandm was creating article for various record search collections, such as England Cheshire Nonconformist Church Records and including at the bottom of the article a line of code that included a CID ref. Why this is being done and why the coding is in a particular format is still unclear to me.

I also coded the template to include an optional display text parameter, but if that is not given the default display is

CID #######

Finally, when coding an article, templates with short titles are easier to type. --Steve 20:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Although I would agree that short titles are easier to type, I believe this may be a mistake. CID appears to be the name of the ID used in the URL to identify which collection is being used within the Record Search product (although it is still considered a pilot product at this time). To me, using this name to reference something within Record Search is not very intuitive nor user friendly . . . maybe even a bit geeky (I resemble that remark, by the way). Being not intuitive, I believe it will be harder for people to remember. It would be similar to referring to a record contained in Ancestry as {{dbid}} since that is the database identifier they use in their URL. Similarly, the IGI uses recid and the new FamilySearch uses bookid. If a template was created for these (very unlikely), I would be opposed to them be called {{recid}} and {{bookid}} respectively. It would make more sense to me to use the actual source name rather than an identifier that is used for internal purposes. Thomas Lerman 00:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)