Index talk:The Pathway of Roses, Larson, 1913

1910 edition

Link to 1910 edition for copy/paste of text.

alternate text

1910 (& subsequent editions excepting the London, 1913 ed.) decorative border

The following text is copied from User talk:MODCHK. No further edits should be made to this section.

Overfloat image help request

MODCHK, Would you consider showing me how to place the text of this page within the corresponding border available at Commons? Does the border image need to be in a format other than .jpg or does it not matter? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I am hardly the best person to answer this, as I usually end up opening up the {{overfloat image}} template and fairly blindly following the recipe in the documentation.

However, to answer your second question first: as the internal image specification is the same as that to simply display said image directly, I do no believe there is any bar to using a particular format. As (I hope) you can see, .jpg works fine.

The order in which I approached this was to first lay out the image to give yourself as much "space" in which to fit the text. I normally make sure it is centred, frameless and at least 400px wide (i.e.

[[File:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) decoration on page 5.jpg|frameless|center|400px]]

File: or Image: both work, your free choice. This then becomes the 'image=' value in:

{{overfloat image
 | image = [[Image:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) decoration on page 5.jpg|frameless|center|400px]]
}}

Step two is to add chunks of text (in this case just the one) using the 'item1=', 'item2=' etc. parameter values. I do not believe more than one <div> is allowed per "item", so grouping using {{block left}} or

etc. is almost obligatory; except in the simplest possible cases. Because this results in loss of justification, I also added {{justify}} at this point.

There is another reason for using the various "block" forms, as the added text needs to be constrained to fit inside the border. I simply fooled around with "|width=300px" until it fitted. (Caveat: "|width=" simply does not do anything if you forget to add "px" or "em"―this can drive you quietly insane.)

To "move" the text block into the right position, use "|x1=" and "|y1=" and experiment. Increasing "x" pushes right; "y" pushes down. (Another caveat not applicable in this instance: if you need to use "hpos" or "vpos" the "x" and "y" effects reverse.)

Finally, to make the text fit in the frame vertically, I used {{fine block}}, mainly for the side effect of it reducing line height. This in turn required re-tweaking "y1" to vertically re-centre the text.

I hope the result is something like that you were looking for?

Oh, and the scan read "all that we may desire in the without shall be added." instead of "all that we may desire in the without may be added."

Must have been a brain slip on my part. Image-to-brain-to-output somehow translated "shall" to "may". Thanks for catching that. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

MODCHK (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Oops. Glad you picked up that quote I accidentally swallowed. MODCHK (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

How 'bout suggestions for this one? Am I being too lazy by asking, or should I keep trying myself? I think a hanging indent of sorts should be used (but normal {{hi}} use causes extra line breaks}}, as well as "white space" at top/bottom to keep the look the same—somewhat like what you did with the "Kernel" page. I tried the {{white}} example you used, but only applied it once resulting in error. If you think I should give it a further shot, then ignore this post for a while. But for now I gotta run. Thanks for above, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, this is my suggestion (basically no change except from applying your own hints!) Oh, and thank you for introducing me to {{italic block}}, which I never even suspected existed before. MODCHK (talk) 00:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! How would you make the white space at top/bottom equidistant, however? Also, italic block doesn't work well in certain instances where I've tried it with lines of poetry in Byron footnotes, but I can't remember why just now. I'll make a mental note next time I confront an example to see (or ask) why that is. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay... So my problem initially with hanging indent was the use of end of line breaks then, right? The hanging indent template creates its own break. Got it.(?) I'll have to fiddle around with your use of coordinates too to see what they do/affect... Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I did get your point about {{hanging indent}} introducing new line breaks―which was why I removed all the &ltbr/>s. Unfortunately this only addresses about 80% of the extra space, and I simply don't know how to get rid of the rest of it. {{line-height}} is a blind alley. I sincerely look forward to any solution you can come up with; because this one really is beyond me―Sorry! MODCHK (talk) 01:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Additional thought: perhaps another way of looking at the coordinates ("x_1,2,..." and "y_1,2,...) might be to think of positive values stepping deeper and deeper into the image area; whilst negative values place the text block further and further outside of it. Hope this helps. MODCHK (talk) 02:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I meant I got the hanging dent issue. As in, "[I] got it. Sorry that wasn't obvious :) My addition of a question mark was due to the fact that when I think I understand something, I later realize I might not actually get it after all. So it was my way of giving myself the benefit of the doubt (that I could be wrong). I'll take a further look at the rest soon. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. Faults all `round, as I knew I had not quite addressed the problem as posed. The main thing is at least we appear to to striving in a reasonably common direction.

Incidentally (completely unrelated matter), thank you for all the experimentation regarding <ref>s especially "follow=xxx" completions on the next page. Following your recipes has been very useful with Index:A colonial autocracy, New South Wales under Governor Macquarie, 1810-1821.djvu. Much deserved credit where it is due! MODCHK (talk) 01:57, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Also incidentally, I've seen Billinghurst (can't remember where) apply ref name/follow in a somewhat different way (if I recall correctly). I think it had to do with where the ref follow material is placed in the body of the Index page. Just a recall moment... Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

All useful to know. I would appreciate a pointer should you recall where you saw that. Please don't go out of your way if it doesn't come to mind easily. MODCHK (talk) 21:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Back to main issue. Curious (no, not criticising!) why you added <br/>s to both Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 5.jpg and Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 15.jpg. I thought I had vertically centred the text within the frame; but was that only true on my screen, and not yours? For reference, page 5 now shows (to me) as text neatly nestled at the bottom of the frame space, and page 15 more or less central, but with a slightly larger gap above than below (maybe 60:40 ratios of space?) MODCHK (talk) 21:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

My screen (with breaks) shows the white space on both pages basically equidistant now relative to top/bottom of border. Must be a screen issue is my guess. I'll remove the breaks... There really wasn't much of a difference beforehand anyhow. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Frankly, your answer concerns me, if the results are so different on different screens. I wonder if one of us has a slightly different font being selected (for example.) To somewhat settle the matter, would you be so kind as to view Page:Alices adventures in Cambridge.djvu/7 and let me know if that page looks unbalanced on your display? (It just happens to be another user of {{overfloat image}}, but which appears to have been reviewed without adverse comment by several people by now.)

I wonder if this might be a matter a little beyond answering between us, and perhaps should consider raising it a little more publicly? MODCHK (talk) 07:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Alice: Twice as much white space at top than at bottom in my view. Re: lack of "adverse comment": People look at images/words with different sets of eyes/perspectives. Some are drawn to white-space use, some to words/meaning, etc., etc. Some are drawn to all aspects, yet some in differing orders and at different times, etc. Harkens back to intent. Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I think I have figured it out, and if I am right I do not like the answer! My browser is Firefox (v.18.0.1) and I happen to have it set for "default font" 'Bitstream Vera Sans' font size 16. If I reduce the font size to (say 10) the page starts looking like that which you are describing. It may be that the root cause of the problem is that your eyesight is simply better than mine!

Because of the way the component parts of {{overfloat image}} have been constrained (image size, text block width and top-left-corner position, all in px), the only factor with any "give" when the text font size varies is the depth of that same block. My reading of section "See also" of {{font-size}} is that WikiSource frowns upon the use of absolute font sizes (which normally seems sensible to me) completely rules out any obvious means of fixing this issue. Yuck!

In complete violation of the rules above, I have (temporarily) added an absolute font size to Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 5.jpg. To me it displays the same as it did before. Can you please have a look and I hope you find the vertical spacing is even again... or the page may be completely ruined... MODCHK (talk) 17:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Vertical spacing has not changed. Twice as much space at bottom than at top (I almost confused it with 'Alice' above and said vice-versa). All else does not seem to be affected by any changes. Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok. y sub 1 affects top margin, and x sub 1 affects right margin, right? Are there 'coordinates' for bottom/left margins too? Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:47, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh... I guess what happens to the top/right also happens to the bottom/left. Sounds sort of (but not quite) like a corollary—hate those! Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Changed 65 to 85. How does the page look to you now? Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

This may be a measure of my frustration with this matter, but following is a screen capture in hopes it demonstrates (please feel free to delete at your leisure.) Unfortunately the rules of overfloat image don't permit both corners of a text block to be controlled at the same time. MODCHK (talk) 21:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

{{center|[[Image:PoR-4-16-21-1-2013.png|600px]]}}

My most recent adjustment (edit) looks good to me in Chrome and IE. The above (as you see it—and thank you for illustrating) is as rendered in Firefox? Desktop/laptop? So could the rules of overfloat image be tweaked? or are there no rules currently in existence written to be so flexible as George Orwell III would like to see available for images, etc.? What exactly is the source of our view discrepancy? Sorry, my thoughts are all over the place. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Oops, we both edited together. Trying again:

Sorry. Similar cerebral back-scatter here as well. Firefox 18.0.1 as above. Desktop. As you can see the text is neatly "flush bottom" within the frame from my point of view.

With regards modifying the template... need to think more. Will get back to you!

What were GOIII's ideas on images? Variable size capability might solve this? MODCHK (talk) 21:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: GO3: You can review here. Lots to wade through. You'll probably understand it better than I do. No—you definitely will understand it more than I! Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the reference which I have now read. Not quite what I was hoping for; but not unrelated either. I am currently thinking either overfloat image requires support for some kind of "middle" alignment, or possibly a table cell. Either way, not quite sure how to bend it without breaking something. On top of which I have to leave for about three hours. To be continued... MODCHK (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Right. Got a version almost fit for human consumption. Sample here: User:MODCHK/Sandbox

I have for the sake of experiment thrown away the overfloat image template and resorted to the various <div>s it used to generate (also now mutilated), now enclosing a single table cell which dynamically centres its content. I have to specify the text block height twice (the 550px and 540px―the difference being allowance for the browser to generate scroll-bars if the text overflows the cell!), which is frankly annoying. Otherwise (only if this works for you) I think the result is simple enough to use directly without modifying {{overfloat image}} to handle the new constraints.

What do you think, please? MODCHK (talk) 02:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

If you please, I need some time to digest. Could be a day or so, so if you see me editing elsewhere, I'm not ignoring your question, etc., I am merely digesting/retreating/digesting, etc. Thanks for the research. Londonjackbooks (talk) 02:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Take as long as you like. This is simply the best compromise I have been able to come up with so far. MODCHK (talk) 02:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I can at least testify that what you have in your Sandbox looks right in my browser. It's the technical stuff above that I will mull over. Londonjackbooks (talk) 13:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

[Technical stuff is now way over my head, so I will defer to y'all where the rest is concerned. When you reach a best-case-scenario, let me know, and I'll copy your (or whatever collaborative) lead to the other similarly-affected pages. Thanks for all, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)]

Well I'm sorry if you are feeling swamped (I freely confess I've been bailing a fair bit myself!) I think I shall let matters mull for a day or so, and if nobody else comments further, then start putting in train the changes to {{overfloat image}} discussed, although technically the template will work well enough as it is―if jumped up and down on hard enough. See Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 15.jpg. I am still hoping Beeswaxcandle's ideas on leading will… lead somewhere usable. MODCHK (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Should that "shall" perhaps read "may" [or "might"?] (Re: letting "matters mull")? I have often made "definitive" statements here (WS), but keep changing my mind after-the-fact! Londonjackbooks (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

That is fine with me. In the interim, I have swallowed my pride and reworked (a copy of) the template to cater for (most of) the changes required. And uncovered an apparent minor logic error in the original, which I have raised with AdamBMorgan. I have not yet received a response. MODCHK (talk) 15:43, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Just a thought from my Desktop Publishing days. In the screen capture above the leading (space between lines of text) is wider in the proofread version than in the scan. I haven't played with the templates in this area as I haven't needed to so far (but I'm watching this conversation with interest as I'm sure to need it at some stage) so I can't point you to something that keeps the same font size but reduces the leading. Even half a point can make a huge difference. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

You are indeed quite right, and in fact I was concerned right from the start with this very issue on the "other" page Londonjackbooks presented as it is really obvious here. Unfortunately like yourself I am at a loss as to how to properly address it, so if anything at all comes to mind I will gratefully accept any suggestions! MODCHK (talk) 07:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

After wandering through Category:Formatting templates I've just found {{Line-height}}, but the examples don't seem to be different when < 100%. Another possibility is playing with {{font-size-x}}. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

{{line-height}} doesn't seem to play nicely with the <div>-based templates as it is based upon a <span>. I have been playing with the same style directives embedded in a <div>, but the effect of line-height seem to last only to the next paragraph break and have to be reasserted again and again. The code is ugly but seems to work here: Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 15.jpg MODCHK (talk) 15:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Further experimentation reveals the lie in my remarks above. In fact enclosing each "paragraph" in its own style-less <div> seems to be one solution to the uneven leading issue; and wrapping the collection thereof in a single {{line-height}} appears to happily control the conglomeration. Same example now updated. MODCHK (talk) 22:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Continued...

• Query: Is there in fact a page 45 in this work (especially since contents page implies there ought to be 351+ pages in total)? There does not appear to be a corresponding JPG scan … MODCHK (talk) 05:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Short answer: Yes (to be read similarly to "duuhhh"). Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Long answer (to give you the benefit of the doubt): Page 45 is the first page of the next chapter. I got ahead of myself yesterday thinking in tens. Photographs vs. scans. I do not want to break the binding, as the book was a gift. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Re. "duuhhh": fair cop. Please be kind to your (obviously quite) precious book. I was really trying to draw attention to the empty place holder rather than the incompleteness of the scan. According to Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page iv.jpg, only 300 more to go! MODCHK (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Didn't even notice that page was completed. Thanks. I wasn't looking forward to proofreading it. One example of not saving the best for last. Londonjackbooks (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• Request: I have (finally!) figured out how to integrate the table cell critical to providing vertical centring into the prototype template. Would somebody else please be so good as to verify if User:MODCHK/Sandbox behaves rationally in their browser?

Smidgen more white space at bottom in Chrome (like 1/6th or something like that), but looks okay.

Your eye is good! Agree. Moved block down 3px and enabled border box for demonstration only. MODCHK (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• • Renders O.K. with varying default font size in Firefox 18.0.1 under Linux. MODCHK (talk) 07:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Chapter transclusion notation

What does it all mean? I 'get' the pages at bottom, but can you please explain what the rest means/does? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 16:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

{{for
|
|call=PageNumWrapper
|pv=page
|pc1n=PNWprefix
|pc1v=The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 
|pc2n=PNWpostfix
|pc2v=.jpg
|89|90|91|92|93|94|95|96|97|98|99|100|101|102|103|105}}

I just got your question. Weather was pretty wild here yesterday (lots of trees blown down etc.) so I got distracted on non-computer tasks.

The above is a shameful demonstration how a lot or research and effort can be invested in "simplifying" an issue; with the end result being no better than doing noting at all! I was hoping to come up with a template similar to the {{Page}} you used for the other chapters, but which would accept multiple pages (or a page range) ala the way <pages> works for DJVU files. As you can see I was not spectacularly successful. (I know; 'not'―but it sounds better than "spectacularly unsuccessful!")

{{for}} is an existing template which absorbs the list at the end (i.e. here: 89|90|91|92|93|94|95|96|97|98|99|100|101|102|103|105) and "calls" another template (here PageNumWrapper) repeatedly, each time passing one parameter in the parameter specified by pv (here page.) So far so good; but if you examine your own use of {{Page}} you will note that it needs each page number specified twice―one for the "num" parameter, and again in the JPG file name. {{for}} only allows one use per iteration, so I had to create the laughably simplistic {{PageNumWrapper}} to copy the value into two places; and then invoke {{Page}}.

Oh, and the "|pc1n=PNWprefix|pc1v=The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page |pc2n=PNWpostfix|pc2v=.jpg" junk is in turn required because this compromise means I cannot let {{for}} "use up" the parameter creating the JPG filename, so PageNumWrapper needs these bits to reconstruct it. Un-pretty.

To reiterate, I was hoping to create something which might be easier to copy and modify from chapter to chapter, but in reality I think the recipe turned out to be closer to mock turkey (i.e neither entirely beast nor fowl.) Up to you which way you want to carry on. MODCHK (talk) 00:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't normally ask this, but could you show me how transclusion would render with straight html (or whatever) without using any templates on the page whatsoever? You don't have to bother with it now (or ever), for I won't be back till tomorrow... but I would be interested. I haven't read your response above thoroughly, but will do so tomorrow. Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

The direct answer is: "I cannot, because you have asked an impossible question." This is because transclusion is a wiki function which takes place before any HTML can be produced. The question I can address is to show you the wiki coding without templates which will achieve the same effect. I hope this is close enough to satisfy the spirit if not the word of your enquiry.

Here is the background, which I warn, you are not going to like due to the quantity of "technical guff" I am going to load on you here (I don't entirely pretend to have a handle on this, so please consult further if need be.) I could not find a "decent" backgrounder on any of the "normal sister" wikis, and so had to resort to the master software site: Extension:Labeled Section Transclusion.

Now because of our private running gag about me not being able to use that word, you are really not(!) going to like this. {{Page}} uses a wiki system extension function which you might have guessed from the backgrounder above is called Labelled Section Transclusion (parser function #lst.) This function causes transclusion of <section>-labelled parts of pages. Because we wish to transclude entire (unrestricted) pages, a variant called #lstx which transcludes everything except a labelled section, which we haven't got anyway here; so we don't have to specify that which we don't want, because we want the entire page! (I never said this wasn't going to be a nightmare or exclusions, did I?)

On top of everything else, the writer of the function decided that "English" names were appropriate, so #lstx has an alias #section-x. If you have all that under your belt, then the wiki code for transcluding Chapter 9 of the "Pathway of Roses", excluding the "pretty header" stuff becomes, literally:

<span><span class="pagenum" id="89" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 89.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 89.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="90" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 90.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 90.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="91" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 91.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 91.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="92" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 92.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 92.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="93" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 93.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 93.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="94" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 94.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 94.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="95" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 95.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 95.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="96" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 96.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 96.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="97" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 97.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 97.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="98" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 98.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 98.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="99" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 99.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 99.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="100" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 100.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 100.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="101" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 101.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 101.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="102" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 102.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 102.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="103" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 103.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 103.jpg}}
<span><span class="pagenum" id="105" title="Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 105.jpg"></span></span>
{{#section-x:Page:The Pathway of Roses, Larson (1913) image of page 105.jpg}}

All of the stuff embedded within the double-<span>s is associated with displaying the page number makers down the left borders.

Feeling swamped yet? MODCHK (talk) 01:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Not yet. Thanks for the explanation & MW ref link. As to the use of the word "not": I am not against its use, as I am sure you know... Merely the manner in which two or more instances are used in a sentence resulting in a full-stop to my brain. 'Let your writing be yea, yea; nay, nay' — or better yet, 'let your writing be yea; nay'. :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 14:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)