Forum:Implicit quest requirements again

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Implicit quest requirements again
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 30 January 2016 by Liquidhelium.
Previous: Forum:Extended requirements on quest articles, Forum:Changes to usage of Quest details template

Currently, a quest's quest requirements are listed in an organised but particularly unhelpful way because it was decided to automatically list all implicit quest requirements (i.e. the requirements' requirements, and, if applicable, theirs, etc.).

This has both advantages and disadvantages. Whilst it's possible to have a list of all quest requirements with a single click, as soon as the list of requirements becomes quite extensive (RotM, Nomad's Elegy), the huge dropdown does more harm than good if you just want to know the primary, first-level quest requirements. Of course, those can be found by tracing the second vertical line from the left but that takes effort and we should assume readers to be lazy (and in this case, the process is quite tedious). Another problem is that some quests may be listed multiple times (we can find Jungle Potion a lovely 6 times on WGS).

So, we could leave this system, revert to our previous structure of only listing the primary requirements, or concoct something new. I would propose the latter option, if technology allows. More specifically, a sort of toggle should be added. By default, the list would only cover the primary requirements (and in that case, the list could be uncollapsed by default since it wouldn't be as long), with an option to extend it to view all the nested requirements as well. This would allow players who only want to view the primary requirements to see those right away without problems, whilst players who want to see all of them are still one click away.

Or feel free to suggest something else. Either way, the current system isn't exactly practical if you ask me. Oh, and sorry if this seems incoherent, I'm rather tired at the moment. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 13:38, January 20, 2016 (UTC)


After reading Mol's comment, my "if technology allows" was a bit silly, as the template already has an option for this. Wasn't really thinking. To make my meaning plainer: I suggest setting the limit to 1 by default and not having the list hidden, with an option to expand the list to include the nested requirements as well at the reader's preference. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:42, January 20, 2016 (UTC)


L2read - Long lists are completely avoidable by anyone who can read Template:Questreq/doc. MolMan 13:41, January 20, 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, er, go tell that to random IPs. This is more about standardising the default appearance of the req list, not redesigning it from scratch. Apologies if I was unclear. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:38, January 20, 2016 (UTC)
What? Who said anything restarting from scratch? MolMan 16:41, January 20, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - I feel like the current system is fine. According to Template:Questreq/doc, the default "cut off" is 9 levels anyway. If people support it enough and feel it needs to be changed, it can be done so easily by modifying Module:Questreq, changing this line I presume - local limit = tonumber(args[2]) or 9. I do somewhat agree that it can get quite tedious having to scroll for what seems like forever, though, so maybe lowering it slightly would help. jayden

Comment - What about using a + sign before the quest link to expand the sub-required quests in a similar way to viewing sub-categories on Category: pages? Having the entire list is excessive, but having only the first level can be too little. Let the reader explore it as much as they want:

<!-- collapsed (default) -->
• [+] While Guthix Sleeps

<!-- expanded -->
• [-] While Guthix Sleeps
   • [+] Foo
   • [+] Bar
   <!-- doesn't expand any further -->
   • Baz

I'm not sure mw-collapsible supports this unless I dig through its documentation, but if not it's simple to make something similar to do the job. cqm 23:22, 20 Jan 2016 (UTC) (UTC)

I don't think it does. But it should be easy to implement, especially since the lists are created directly with html. MolMan 23:25, January 20, 2016 (UTC)
That could work. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 13:39, January 21, 2016 (UTC)

Closed - Some reasonable condensing of the implicit requirements can be done. The implicit requirements themselves will stay. --LiquidTalk 02:22, January 30, 2016 (UTC)