User talk:Davewellington

MOVE TO STRIKE ARROW GRAPHICS AND BUTTON GRAPHICS FROM THE WIKI

Rationale: Arrows are already included in HTML.

↑

↗

→

↘

↓

↙

←

↖

And buttons are letters, also already included in HTML.

A

B

C

D

This is not SRK, we should have some manner of professionalism here.

There is a tick mark too ✓ but I'm more OK with keeping the image tick mark due to traditional color contrast of the green tick mark ✓ against the red cross mark ✗ (yup, there's a cross mark too, unicode is awesome). Though in hindsight, it might be possible to do at least a page global span for ticks and crosses so I may end up doing through everything and changing it as well.

Ultron replies:

Those ticks show up as missing characters for me. Ultron 01:28, 14 November 2011 (GMT)

Ultron:

That's not a helpful statement. A helpful statement would include at least the following:

• Operating System
• Browser
• Available fonts/Currently used fonts
• An explanation as to why you don't use unicode like the rest of the world.

The tick thing is currently not on the table for changing, in case the paragraph wasn't clear. It *might* be possible - I don't know and even if it was I am not going to hunt down every page just to change it. --Korszca 01:43, 14 November 2011 (GMT)

Korszca:

I'm using Unicode
Windows XP
Firefox 8
Dungeon font (tried "Allow pages to choose their own fonts, instead of my selections above" but apparently no font has been set for the wiki cause it stayed on Dungeon, I changed my default font and still it stayed Dungeon on the wiki, so it must be using Serif, Sans serif or Monospace, which I have set to Dungeon.)
The other fonts I have available are whatever come with XP and maybe Microsoft Office 2003 (not sure if installation of that included any fonts.)
I don't have many foriegn language sets installed, so Japanese and Chinese characters show up missing, and that's what those ticks looks simmilar to in Firefox (Firefox has its own "missing characters" look). Ultron 02:30, 14 November 2011 (GMT)

Ultron:

Awesome! Thanks for the response. I changed the paragraph with the ticks in it to Times, let me know if that changes anything for you.

FWIW, yes, installing any version of Office will give you some fonts not included with Windows.

(PS - I fixed the formatting of your response, a <p> must end with a </p> otherwise it breaks future responses.)--Korszca 02:39, 14 November 2011 (GMT)

Korszca:

The font changed but the ticks are still coming up as missing characters. I forgot to mention before that the cross is also a missing character. Ultron 03:23, 14 November 2011 (GMT)

Ultron:

Do the diagonal arrows display correctly at the top of the page? It sounds like either Windows XP doesn't go quite as deep into Unicode as later versions of Windows might or Firefox 8 broke Unicode support (to be fair, Firefox breaking Unicode sounds unlikely).

I'm using a few month old FreeBSD 8-STABLE and an extremely recent OpenBSD-current with webkit-based browsers on several different arches (x86, x64, SPARC, and loongson). Some have webfonts enabled and others do not. All display correctly.

Davewellington uses Windows 7 x64 and sees all the marks, for reference.

Let me know if the diagonal arrows work for you. --Korszca 03:41, 14 November 2011 (GMT)

Korszca:

Yes the diagonal arrows show up for me. All the arrows do. Ultron 03:45, 14 November 2011 (GMT)

Ultron:

OK - since I currently have no plans to implement the tick and cross changes, I'm going to consider the issue closed (no changes/no need to fix). If that changes at any point in the distant future, I will test across a larger base.

If you notice any other formatting issues or any other technical issues in the wiki, drop me a note in my own discussion page.

Davewellington:

Feel free to blank or delete this page, since we are going to continue using and . --Korszca 03:56, 14 November 2011 (GMT)