Template talk:Spoken

With expansion of focus

With the expansion of focus, does it make more sense to move the template to a more generic name? — billinghurst sDrewth 23:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but I haven't thought of anything appropriate yet. I did consider "media key" or "multimedia key" but single words seem to be the best for templates (quicker to type & easier to remember). Something simple and intuitive would be best. (I've also moved Speaker to Media, althogh that is probably obvious from the documentation.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:00, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Quick thoughts. 1) Medium (as derived from the media). 2) Utilise media though change the options so it gives a symbol only, a modicum of complexity, though keeps to the one template. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:52, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I had not thought of option two but it does sound better to have everything in one template. I've copied the code and documentation over, so {{Media}} should now replace the functions of both {{Speaker}} and {{Spoken}}. I haven't made many changes to either implementation; it just has a parameter to switch between uses. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 19:00, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Change in wording

Because books are not exclusively split into "Chapters", or, if we decide to split very large works into smaller parts for the ease of the reader, the use of chapter is not encompassing. I think that "section" should be used. Does anyone have a problem with me changing this?

one or more sections are available in a spoken word format.

one or more sections are available in a musical format.

one or more sections are available in a video format.

- Theornamentalist (talk) 00:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that it is necessary at the moment. The indication is clear, and being a template, we can change it if and when necessary. One would also think that works are generally chapters. We probably need to look at default words and if/where there is a requirement to change the word that a parameter is available. I am also thinking that music is generally not in chapters and we are more likely to have the work complete, so probably worth a more encompassing solution. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

For example see The Bad Child's Book Of Beasts; I split it into sections so that each animal can be viewed individually, and they are not defined as chapters. Also Peter and Wendy - Margaret Ogilvy, a publication which includes two separate works by Barrie, the first being split in the contents section by chapter and the second, not by chapter. And Poems (Coates 1916)/Volume I is split by poem, which definitely are not chapters; there is no sound file that is being used in the last work but if someone were to create them, chapters would not work either. I agree that it could just be a formality, but I think something can fit better. Regarding music, although without a given example I can imagine a book including songs to potentially have a single song page hosting the music to said song as an enhancement. Because it is the the least defining, how about

contains spoken word.

contains music.

contains video.

or "this work contains one or more portions of" "one or more portions are available in"... - Theornamentalist (talk) 06:54, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

suggest minimalist change at the moment {{{parts|chapters}}} that allows override with a default value, and that allows us to work out whether there is a more standard means for each of the types of media contained. Noting that {{spoken}} is now configured for a variety of media. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:17, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I can agree to that for now. I'm fine with introducing parts as an override. - Theornamentalist (talk) 16:28, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Although I made the change to {{media}} rather than this template. Replacing all instances of {{spoken}} and {{speaker}} with {{media}} is literally on my to do list but I'm afraid I haven't got around to them all so far. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

running a bot through them now (that is what bots are for, and to save you to be creative somewhere else on site). Should we mod this template so it subst: its code to apply {{media}}, ie. we let them use it, though we convert it on save. Then we annotate documentation to that aspect. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

and invoked it here — billinghurst sDrewth 01:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

and converted {{speaker}} — billinghurst sDrewth 04:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I've changed the documentation, and slightly modified the template, for Spoken. Is this what you had in mind? - AdamBMorgan (talk) 13:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)