Template talk:Kangxi/t

Skip the switch

@Sarang: , why do we use aliases + switches in place of the suffix itself ? I fail to see the comparative advantage, but I do see the computing cost as my browser froze 4 times in past 2 days due to overload of switches. Yug (talk) 12:37, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Yug: , it is not the switch which freezes your ordinateur – it is the necessary existence check. I can just make a version without that check, not showing the difference whether a letter is shown by a file or not. -- sarang♥사랑 07:00, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello Sarang, nice to hear back from you :)

As for the aliases, I think they are not necessary and even, using the exact extension will present some advanges (code simplicity, maintenability). If you agree I may lead this change.

As for existence check, true, thank to remind me of this... So the alternative is to have either the image or its red link string, right ? Yeah, it's unelegant indeed...

Yug (talk) 09:51, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Yug: , it depends on what you need - or, more general, what will be needed: either an overview of all 214 radicals showing which files are yet existing, or the categories of the files. AFAIK there are not yet categories of only the radicals - is there a need for? -- sarang♥사랑 10:14, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

I do not see the need for radicals-specific SOP/ACC categories.

But as contributors we need to keep track of the progress and missing files, yes. The red link would take too much horizontal length and destroy the table's aesthetic. So the current code (existence check) seems good.

We just have to be careful and not put too many existence check in a same page. By experience, including two tables of kangxi radicals and it starts to slow down my computer durably, even crashing it several time. Yug (talk) 11:10, 28 October 2021 (UTC)