Page talk:History of Oregon Newspapers.pdf/77

@Peteforsyth: Wondering if you were aware of <blockquote>? or if you prefer smaller block for your purposes? No preference here, just wondering if you were aware of the tag or not. Londonjackbooks (talk) 22:07, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, @Londonjackbooks:. I have no strong preferences about formatting, as a general rule I mainly want to get "past it" to focus on content. So, I use what I know, and sometimes experiment with new stuff. I'm aware of blockquote, but it seems to me -- and maybe this is inaccurate -- that there's a strong preference around here for templates that apply more sophisticated formatting. I'd love to simply use blockquote for stuff like this, if it's acceptable -- easier for me, often easier to read, often easier for those reusing our works, etc. One question -- don't raw HTML tags tend to break when spanning page breaks? What would I do about a blockquote spanning two pages?

Are you perhaps able to point me to a good example of a work that uses it heavily, and/or to any discussion about various approaches to formatting quotations? -Pete (talk) 22:43, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

From way back (2008), there is this page as an example of the use spanning multiple pages. Looks like it doesn't break in the Main. How things tend to work technically here are usually beyond my ken, so I can't attest to any problematic issues such as breaking, etc. I see the tag used here and there, now and then. I have used it occasionally, but couldn't find an example to point you to from my proofreading. Best would be to inquire at Scriptorium if you are ever inclined to explore other approaches to get better direction than I can supply :) Your current approach is perfectly fine! Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Forgot to ask: How do you define "sophisticated" with regard to formatting? Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, very helpful to see it in action, and I guess my sense of what tags can't handle page breaks needs some refining. Regarding "sophisticated" -- taking a closer look here, it really didn't make any sense in this context. I was simply "going with what I know" in using templates that I know to work, and had not seen blockquote in use much here. I think I can figure out how to use AWB to change all the "smaller" blocks in this work to blockquote tags...and I appreciate the suggestion.

(Even if not relevant here, let me answer...I think the Wikisource community has developed many "sophisticated" templates and tools that permit, for instance, making the text here very closely match the formatting of the original. It's sophisticated in that it accomplishes that task well, and took a good deal of technical knowhow to make it work. Sometimes figuring out which tool to use is beyond me, and I'd rather just focus on the text, so sometimes I don't take the time to figure out the best template or tag...in which case, I very much appreciate somebody looking over my shoulder and suggesting something that will work better, as you've done here.) -Pete (talk) 17:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

:) I asked about "sophisticated" because when I read it, the words "keep it simple" popped into my head. I suppose the least amount of formatting that is required to get the job done sufficiently is a good goal here, and there are a lot of good templates &c. that fit that bill sufficiently and elegantly. I am constantly blown away by the ability/knowhow of those who create/maintain the templates & tools we have at our disposal. I am at the mercy of those in the know when it comes to deciding what formatting to use. Many opinions in that area :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with "keep it simple," but I sometimes get on a roll doing something one way without a lot of thought. Helpful feedback, and I'll gladly adjust! -Pete (talk) 19:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Me as well. Tell me what works 'best' (with all that entails) and [if I like how it looks/works] I'll use it :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:23, 17 May 2018 (UTC)