Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Module:Br separated entries

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was  Merge. The modules have been merged for a while now, so there's nothing left to discuss here. I've applied WP:IAR and deleted Module:Br separated entries, as it looks like people have been reluctant to close this due to its technical nature. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 23:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Module:Br separated entries


Propose merging Module:Br separated entries with Module:Separated entries.

These two modules mostly do the same thing, with the exception that Module:Br separated entries can only use  as a separator and Module:Separated entries trims spaces and newlines at the beginning and end of parameters. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 12:26, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge I wrote Module:Br separated entries to have the exact same behaviour as the old Template:Br separated entries, including the amount of whitespace added, but abstracted to any number of entries, rather than just three. However, there probably isn't any actual need to keep the same whitespace as the old template, so I would have no problem with this being merged. (In fact, I think it should ultimately be merged with unbulleted list for accessibility reasons, although that's a different discussion, and I think that there was a TfD discussion about that already if anyone can dredge up the link.) — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 12:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Module:Separated entries shouldn't be merged with Unbulleted list; the two serve different purposes. Rather, where Br separated entries is used for the purpose of creating a list, it should be swapped with Unbulleted list - provided that Unbulleted list emits no output when all of its parameters are blank. Alakzi (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * In some situations (such as if an entry begins with a list item; see Template:Col-float) it would be useful to keep whitespace. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 13:19, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't we also merge Module:Comma separated entries with these two? Alakzi (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure about that, since it uses the function  and not just a plain character string like  . If you feel that it should be added to the nomination then do so. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 13:19, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. Presumably, that was done to ease migration to Wikipedias of languages written in the Sino-Japanese and Arabic alphabets. I don't know enough about the localization library to imagine a solution. ? Alakzi (talk) 13:51, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * We don't really need to worry about other-language wikis too much - if they do copy our modules, they can always alter them locally to make them work with the correct punctuation. I don't remember exactly why I chose to use the MediaWiki message now, but it was probably just because it's nice to keep it in sync with the official MediaWiki:Comma-separator. (Not that I can imagine that ever changing.) Still, it's not too hard to merge the modules and still use the MediaWiki message. You can just do something with separate functions like this. By the way, it isn't necessary to use  instead of a normal space - these are used in template code because parser functions like #if trim whitespace, but this isn't a problem in Lua modules. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 12:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The separator is a named parameter, so whitespace is stripped before it is passed on to the module. undefined. Alakzi (talk) 12:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep, so you should do it in the module itself if you can. If you use, then the space will get trimmed to an empty string before being passed to Lua, and then if you html-encode it inside Lua it would still be an empty string. So html-encoding wouldn't make any difference in that scenario. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 13:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what the relevance of HTML decoding to unescaped whitespace is; encoded whitespace, newlines, and other specials need to be decoded to be registered by the MediaWiki parser farther down the pipe, e.g. in constructing a list. If I were to remove,   would not produce a list. I suppose we could assign the first and second unnamed parameters to the separator and conjunction, but that would come at the expense of an intuitive interface. Alakzi (talk) 13:48, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, decoding, not encoding. Sorry, I misread the module. It's an interesting idea, but still probably not necessary. If you're making a template for other users to use, it would be better to put the separator inside the module itself, as that's faster than going through an intermediate template that does the same thing (and would only be able to make a limited number of items available). And for end users typing the separator in themselves, it would be easier to just type the whole list in as wikitext rather than have to figure out how HTML entities work. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 14:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * This is about the module though; Br separated entries would invoke the module, and not any other template. For some background: Module:Separated entries and Separated entries have been used for producing semicolon- (Interlanguage link multi), - (Shy) and em-space-delimited (Infobox NFL player) entries. I've also used the former extensively for template substitution, as it provides a functional interface to what would've been a series of #if clauses (see the line in User:Alakzi/ITts, which includes the list syntax above). Alakzi (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * We merged these about a month ago, so if anybody would like to put a coversheet on it, by all means. Alakzi (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy close, no rationale for deletion offered. Merge away by all means.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Module:Br separated entries is now unused, so it can probably be deleted. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 04:03, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.