Template talk:!
From Gentoo Wiki
Not working and now redundant
Talk status
This discussion is done.
This template may be deprecated by the inclusion, in MediaWiki ≥ 1.24, of the built-in magic word {{!}}. As things currently stand, the template is not working as expected, anyway. Simply deleting it may fix the problem. - dcljr (talk) 09:54, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
- OK, I've fixed the template so it seems to work now, but it's still apparently redundant and therefore should be deleted. - dcljr (talk) 09:56, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well… apparently the existence of the magic word is causing this template to not work right (so maybe the magic word itself is not working properly??) — even when the template contains the same transcluded content as the [deleted] sandbox version, which does work. Weird. - dcljr (talk) 10:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
- Nevermind. Upon further investigation, I realize that the magic word
{{!}}is actually working the way it should. I hadn't considered the fact that template testcases are rendered inside of tables, so the magic word will be interpreted as (table) wiki markup in that context, not as a regular vertical-bar character. What this means for temlpate editors is that a different template will need to be used in "/testcases" subpages to show the same effect as the magic word{{!}}. I'll be back soon to clarify this further. - dcljr (talk) 05:17, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- Nevermind. Upon further investigation, I realize that the magic word
- Well… apparently the existence of the magic word is causing this template to not work right (so maybe the magic word itself is not working properly??) — even when the template contains the same transcluded content as the [deleted] sandbox version, which does work. Weird. - dcljr (talk) 10:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
- No need to clarity further. You can just close this discussion if you're done with it. --Maffblaster (talk) 00:36, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
- I've been replacing instances of the table-based {{testcase}} with the non-table {{test case}}. Nothing further needs to be done with this template, AFAIK. I've already tried to clarify the situation in the docs of this template. - dcljr (talk) 06:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)