Template talk:USSCcase

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The cited cases section should include only a few of the most important and perhaps it should be changed to include links not made in the document itself, including future cases that cite this one. This template should also order case reference in a list automatically generating links.--Metal.lunchbox 21:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Changed cited cases to linked cases. documents themselves already make tons of citations to cases. can figure out how to automatically make links out of list items, but all it takes is a few bracketts.--Metal.lunchbox 03:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need to add function for per curiam majority so as not to have confusing dead link to opinion of the court--Metal.lunchbox 21:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Issue when combined with <pages>[edit]

There's a compatibility issue between this template (as well as {{USSCcase2}}) and <pages> syntax. If <br /> tag is removed from immediately below these templates on Kelo v. New London and Kelo v. New London/Opinion of the Court, and if the user is using Firefox or Chrome, the links in the USSC templates cannot be clicked. Any ideas? —Spangineerwp (háblame) 22:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See this old version of Kelo v. New London to see what I'm talking about. —Spangineerwp (háblame) 22:50, 26 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unfortunately I'm not running either browser so I'm of no help here - works fine. I'll point it out to Stephen if he comes around later tonight. At any rate, both templates are fairly old & clunky at this point and most likely need to be replaced for something more elegant as well as streamlined. George Orwell III (talk) 23:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your edit broke the template for me, sadly. I agree with you on replacing these... perhaps a horizontal bar? Hmmm.... —Spangineerwp (háblame) 23:36, 26 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The temp-templates look like crap in plain old IE. This is another Firefox/IE duality of displays issue I guess. My best guess is that the indented-page class is inheriting the style parameters of the template prematurely but w/o running one of the other browsers I am only speculating. George Orwell III (talk) 17:27, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmmm.... Kelo v. New London looks about the same to me in both IE and Chrome right now (with {{USSCcase/temp}} in place). What don't you like about it? (maybe better to respond at Wikisource_talk:WikiProject_U.S._Supreme_Court_cases#An_attempt_at_new_USSCcase_templates) —Spangineerwp (háblame) 17:48, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's the usual small square boxes instead of spaces before and after the mdashes.
What happens to the original template's link display when the indented page div class is temporarily removed, Still no longer clickable ???
Also - I tried to fix that anoying line break between pp. 506 & 507 George Orwell III (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think those spaces are a browser issue; I wasn't seeing boxes in IE8 on my home computer nor IE7 on my work computer. Anyway, just removed them. What do you think of setting it off with colors (look through the history of Template:USSCcase/temp)? —Spangineerwp (háblame) 18:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looks much, much better & and no more random unicode characters. I'd pull it out of the notes field though - it starts to lose it's "pop" when the amount of justices starts to force a wrap to a second line. George Orwell III (talk) 19:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Amicus Breifs[edit]

I think it would be benneficial to have links to amici briefs the same way we link cases.Bryce Carmony (talk) 07:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

UI issues[edit]

I'm not sure if it was ever different and a global css or javascript change broke it, but right now there is no indication that you click on the widget to expand it and it's collapsed by default. Probably we have a lot of visitors who can't figure how or even whether it's possible to view the content of cases as a result. My own gut feeling is that it should be expanded by default and maybe not even collapsible. Prosody (talk) 06:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can't figure out what happened to the "show/hide" indicator or messages either so I stopped the infobox from collapsing by default until a solution presents itself. -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:29, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Validation error: dt without dd[edit]

This template seems to be creating <dt> elements without a <dd>, which results in a validation error when exported to epub: Error while parsing file: element "dl" incomplete; missing required element "dd". For example, in Zeller v. Switzer, Line 18 column 6 of OPS/c28_Zeller_v._Switzer.xhtml:

<dl style="margin-left:0;"><dt style="margin-bottom:-0.25em;"><span id="heading1"><a href="/wiki/Zeller_v._Switzer/Opinion_of_the_Court" title="Zeller v. Switzer/Opinion of the Court">Opinion of the Court</a></span></dt></dl>

Sam Wilson 06:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed the dl and dt. Sam Wilson 01:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]