Wiki documentation for Simutrans-Experimental

[jamespetts]

Some consideration should be given to how to handle Simutrans-Experimental content on the wiki, whether to integrate it with documentation of Standard features, or to have separate pages. I am in favour of integrating it with Standard content (marked so as to be clear what applies to each), but there should perhaps be some discussion on that topic.

[Frank]

Some consideration should be given to how to handle Simutrans-Experimental content on the wiki, whether to integrate it with documentation of Standard features, or to have separate pages. I am in favour of integrating it with Standard content (marked so as to be clear what applies to each), but there should perhaps be some discussion on that topic.

it's just the question whether together with standard more confused than helps

definitely needs the clear separation by formatting (color)

i think split topic for this

[jamespetts]

I have split the topic as you suggested, as it would be helpful to have a thread dedicated to this issue.

Colour separation seems to be a good way of doing it, although I suggest that there be some other indication in addition to colour, as colour blindness is fairly common; perhaps a text note at the beginning of an entry to indicate that it is applicable only to either Standard or Experimental?

[Ves]

I must say that I'm not clearly convinced that having both exp and standard parameters in the same sections would be the best. Especially when parameters shift functions or are modified slightly (eg the combined livery and image definitions of vehicles). It would be very difficult to explain without confusing.
I would suggest separate pages containing all parameters, so standard developers don't ever touch parameters which are experimental and experimental don't tuch unneeded standard parameters. As standard paksets might need to be backward compatible for reasons, experimental per definition don't need that.
Maybe, to make it clear and easy to share some pages between standard and exp, have two columns of reference pages at the overview: first column referring to standard and where special experimental entries exist in some objects, an exp page are displayed next to the standard one?

[jamespetts]

I should be interested in others' views on this; what would people find easier to use?

I should be concerned at having to repeat the Standard definitions, those definitions getting out of date in the Experimental section, or users having to use two pages (the Standard and Experimental page) where one would suffice, thus making it harder to use the documentation.

[isidoro]

I'm in favor of combining both versions in one page, telling apart which features apply to Exp, which to Std, and which to both.

The reason is simple.  Whenever the common part is improved by Std or Exp fans, both versions will benefit.

[Frank]

I think the best solution would be experimental to be inserted at the end of the page.


It is then spatially separated to avoid confusion on one side but.

[jamespetts]

I think the best solution would be experimental to be inserted at the end of the page.


It is then spatially separated to avoid confusion on one side but.

That could work, depending on the page format. In multi-section pages, perhaps at the end of each section, not the whole page?

[Frank]

I think that this will be a decision individually for each page.

Depending on the scope and structure of each page.

[jamespetts]

Seems sensible.

[Frank]

example for format

a quicktag write

Code Select Expand

{DIV( class="experimental" width="100%")} __''Simutrans Experimental''__       {DIV}

This line will be inserted with one click. The content needs then be inserted at the end of the line just before the {DIV}.

At the end of the page only this line is.



up to 2 pages ( 'Menu up to version 0.99.17.1' ( not all translate ) and 'Ground parameters ( vers. 0.120.0.1 + )' ( blank page ) ) should now all other pages in English be