Forum:Standardising entity infoboxes

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Standardising entity infoboxes
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 10 June 2021 by IsobelJ.

Proposal #1

RuneScape's three main (only?) entity types are scenery, non-player character and item. We use infoboxes to display data about these entities that can be quickly looked up. Instead of using one infobox template per entity type, we usually have a few templates for the same entity type. For example, we have {{Infobox Gravestone}} for scenery objects that act as gravestones, and {{Infobox rock}} for objects that act as Mining rocks.

This causes a lot of templates to either have missing logic (entity IDs, etc.) or duplicated logic which can easily become outdated needs more work to be maintained.

Now, we could turn all templates into modules and use a parent module from which other modules could import from, but I would rather move the data that is not specific to the whole entity type (for example, skill info, as opposed to a release date) into its own template, which would be displayed on the left. This lets readers quickly browse the information that is specific to that entity's purpose rather than having it mixed with the other general entity info. OSW has Template:Skill info which we could adopt in the appropriate cases.

Most of the templates affected would be:

In short, these templates would be modified to strip them from general entity info and styled into a nice table with only the more specific info (skill info, etc.) which would be located after the lead section; in their original place we would use a standard entity infobox. I know other stuff depends on some of these templates so it would be a matter of being more careful with some templates and making sure everything else still works.

Proposal #2

Adopt osrsw:Template:Multi Infobox for use in pet pages, to display both the NPC and item versions. See osrsw:Forum:Multi infobox for the discussion they had over there regarding this template. We may need to ignore the weight field or something for interface pets.

Proposal #3

Always make the entity infobox used in the page coincide with the game's entity type. We use {{Infobox scenery}} for some NPCs which in practice act as scenery. This causes some problems when, for example, querying pages using the Infobox scenery template with DPL, and having NPCs appearing in the results. Irrelevant fields such as race or gender would be hidden or informed with a value that indicates they are not applicable. Or we could use a |scenery = yes parameter that automatically deals with NPC-like parameters without having to inform each of them and preventing a "Needs x" category from being applied.

Discussion

Support all 1, 2 - Habblet (talk|c) 14:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Support withdrawn for proposal #3 in my comment to Aescopalus below. Habblet (talk|c) 10:22, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Comment - Can you mock something up on how I would rather move the data that is not specific to the whole entity type (for example, skill info, as opposed to a release date) into its own template, which would be displayed on the left. might look? I can't picture this really looking good for most cases. It works with (mining) rocks and summoning pouches, equipment etc for certain stats but not sure It'd look great for other things (eg monster stats). I think I tend to prefer it in 1 infobox. Seers headband 2 chathead.png Elessar2 (talk) 15:36, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Question - I guess actually the main thing I want to know is what is the purpose of this change? This causes a lot of templates to either have missing logic (entity IDs, etc.) or duplicated logic which can easily become outdated needs more work to be maintained. Seems like it would be best fixed by adding more logic/prebuilt functions to infobox base module. Seers headband 2 chathead.png Elessar2 (talk) 15:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

As I say in the first proposal, it lets readers quickly see the data that is specific to that entity's purpose without being mixed with the other general fields. See Obstacle pipe (Yanille Agility dungeon). You can see the general information about the scenery object and the skill info is separate from that. The reader becomes used to it and knows where to quickly find the relevant info based on visual cue/section title/table location (usually after lead section); like: skill icon, relevant fields, always in the same order, not mixed with other data that the reader isn't looking for. Habblet (talk|c) 16:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Support 1*, Strong oppose 2, Support 3* - Based on chat on discord, I support 1, we just need to be very very careful with finding all the places infobox params are dpled, or used in gadgets etc. It will make pages more consistently formatted though, but we need decide how to handle places where the new box only applies to a certain version eg is the default displayed, is a single cell displayed that shows "This version does have combat stats" or similar text (I prefer the later for clarity). I am strongly opposed to creating a multi-infobox template, we already have a similar thing with {{Switch infobox}} and some older info templates that have a multi version (though I think those have been phased out). I think that creating one infobox that handles these multi cases is better, especially to prevent nested switches! I think creating a monster/npc one that handles both scenery and npc versions is a better move (pretty sure infobox npc already does this). For proposal 3 I think using params is the right move (as I mention re monster/npc infobox). It probably also possibly needs new categories, since imho there would need to be a page for scenery as the cache/game function concept and scenery as the player experience concept if that makes sense. Not sure of cases where race or gender are irrelevant, seems more like they'd just be unknown (as in unknown/not defined in the game vs unknown on the wiki)? Seers headband 2 chathead.png Elessar2 (talk) 17:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Re #2: I'm holding off replying for now since there seems to be a technical drawback I hadn't considered (though it looks like it can be handled), but I still prefer it stylistically. In regards to creating a monster/npc one that handles both scenery and npcs versions I'm not sure what you mean. As far as I know what infobox npc and scenery do is accept ids from both entities which is what I want to avoid with proposal #3. Habblet (talk|c) 18:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Yeah I guess stylistically, seeing riblets solution on osw I'm not opposed to it, but I think we should get the switch script to work first, and not entirely clear how the switch would work on the secondary infoboxes (would they also be nested)? Re #3 Sorry I used an opposite example to yours, in your example I'd say using {{Infobox scenery}} (as on Floating essence) is correct, just need to add "cache" categories to infoboxes. The assumption being that to most users the appearance/usage in game is more relevant than the actual cache implementation, but if we add "cache" categories it's possibly to search based on cache implementation (not currently possible on wiki for npcs or scenery). See below table for clarification of my suggested implementation:
Game usage Cache version Infobox Categories
NPC NPC Infobox npc Non-player characters, Cache npc
NPC Scenery Infobox npc Non-player characters, Cache object
Scenery NPC Infobox interactive scenery Interactive scenery, Cache npc
Scenery Scenery Infobox interactive scenery Interactive scenery, Cache object
Seers headband 2 chathead.png Elessar2 (talk) 21:25, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
I prefer that the use of infoboxes be unambiguous, so in case of confusion we can teach new users a simple instruction for using the correct template: entity type is revealed through the colour of the entity's name (minus edge cases). This also helps categorisation which is not currently working properly (it has to handle actions, examine, and the entity type determined through the id/objectid/npcid parameter to apply various categories). This can be fixed but continuing as is means that an entity's true type is ambiguous until its ID is informed, since a "scenery" NPC whose id is not informed will be assumed to be scenery, based on the template it's using. I feel like a strict X entity = X infobox is clearer in the long run. I don't believe it's something too difficult that new users can't pick up on. Habblet (talk|c) 12:51, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm supporting the category proposal, but would change them to be "Cache NPCs" and "Cache scenery" and to be hidden categories. Perhaps a different wording that doesn't suggest that these entities are only found in the cache may be necessary, like "NPCs according to cache". Habblet (talk|c) 14:21, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Support 1, Comment 2, Weak oppose 3 - Number 1 makes sense, the info tangled in the current infoboxes can be placed in a different skill box on the page like is done with Thieving on RS3 or just in general on OS wiki.

For 2, one problem that RS3 has that OSRS does not for the multi-infobox is that each pet effectively has multiple growth stages. As far as I'm aware, OSRS only deals with this for cats, and splits those pages, while RS3 has the pages merged and has a lot more of those situations (e.g. puppies vs dogs, chicks vs birds, etc.). Would you keep all stages in a single page with the multibox, or split them?

For 3, agree with Elessar's suggestion of categories for infobox vs cache, presentation-wise though I think the primary consideration should be how the average user interacts with the npc/object, with the definition of how the game treats it being a secondary consideration through categories. Otherwise, you'll end up with certain situations where an article is simultaneously both an NPC and an object from a cache perspective, such as Awowogei, which can be handled with the current status quo, but would need either a custom template or an explicit Switch box to deal with in the new version. Smithing.pngAescopalus talkCrafting.png 21:06, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Re #2: I feel like the coloured pets' growth stage situation is out of scope for this proposal. Per status quo, all kitten and cat versions should already be in the infobox. I believe a separate discussion should be had on how to handle those situations.
Re #2, I'm not a fan of the presentation for multiple variations via the nesting for Cat in the OSRS version, since we'd effectively end up with 15 variations times 2 (item vs follower) in a single infobox with a tab switch and a nested switchfobox switch. I'm opposing only softly as I don't have a better solution I can think of, but also don't like either how it's currently implemented or the proposed replacement. Smithing.pngAescopalus talkCrafting.png 21:00, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I can see it wouldn't look very nice, but if #1 passes, item icons would have to be removed from the pet infobox anyway (since they would be replaced with the NPC infobox + a pet info table), and we need to put them somewhere. If #2 doesn't pass, we'd still need to put them in an item infobox and it'll look worse than if it didn't pass. As has been suggested on Discord, it may be worth having a discussion for splitting Cat. Habblet (talk|c) 10:22, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Re #3: From a cache perspective, NPCs and objects are always separate (in the sense that we can't tell which entities are they associated with purely from the cache). So we can have situations where you're entering the shady grove and a gatekeeper speaks to you, but it's not the same one as the one guarding the entrance. And I wish there was a nice way to represent or record this data accurately, but I've come to understand that there probably isn't a way that is user-friendly (even for advanced data users), for now. So I'm withdrawing my support for proposal #3, but there is still some code rework necessary to make SMW and categories work properly in all cases (there are quite a few) and I've sort of given up already on trying to make it work. Habblet (talk|c) 14:21, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Port over all OSW's templates/modules Support all --Legaia2Pla · ʟ · 20:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Support 1, 2 and 3 - Even interface pets exist as items, so do all still have things like weight defined. Although the baby/adolescent stage legendary pets items have placeholder names and icons. I would rather we use infobox NPC for things that are actually NPCs and Infobox scenery for things that are actually objects. Any character that appears exclusively as scenery but you still speak to at some point will have an associated NPC for use in dialogue anyway. also what about infobox deity Adventurer's log Wahisietel (Talk) Quest map icon.png 21:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Do you have any specific reasoning for I would rather we use infobox NPC for things that are actually NPCs and Infobox scenery for things that are actually objects.? Seers headband 2 chathead.png Elessar2 (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Not really, besides simplicity/accuracy. Feels better to have all NPCs use NPC infoboxes and all scenery use scenery infoboxes rather than some NPCs having a scenery infobox and some scenery having an NPC infobox. Adventurer's log Wahisietel (Talk) Quest map icon.png 15:51, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps a hybrid infobox could be made for those situations? Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 15:54, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Support 1 and 2 - This is something that osw does very well and I think that we should follow suit. All of the infoboxes you've linked are at heart, objects or NPCs. These should be the infoboxes we use and the skill (or what ever else it may be) specifics should be moved into their own infobox. Lava hawk.png BlackHawk (Talk)    16:34, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Comment - I propose calling the secondary infoboxes databoxes so it's clear they're not 'actual' infoboxes. So to be clear: the template at the top right of articles are infoboxes, templates like {{Infobox bonuses}} would become databoxes, and the templates at the bottom are navboxes. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 09:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Closed - there is consensus to implement the first proposal of simplifying the use of infoboxes to the three main kinds of item, scenery and npc. More content specific information will be moved to databoxes elsewhere on the page. The type of infobox used will reflect the game usage per Elessar's proposal, and there will be categorisation to document both in-game usage and cache categorisation. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 09:21, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Edit: there is also consensus to implement proposal 2. Though Elessar and Aescopalus have raised some concerns about how well this would apply to RS3 content, it seems the best option for now will be to work with this proposal as the implementation of proposal 1 will necessitate changes to infoboxes on pet pages in any case. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 08:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)