Template talk:DODS

From Valve Developer Community
Revision as of 12:05, 14 March 2011 by MossyBucket (talk | contribs) (Moved discussion here.)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

DODS

(The following section was previously posted on my user discussion page, but moved here. --MossyBucket (formerly Andreasen) 12:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC) )

What is your reasoning on why Dods is good and DODS is bad? I can't think of any reason not to allow DODS, particularly if it just substitutes Dods anyway. You don't need to "let people know" anything because there's no legitimate reason not to allow both templates, they're just alternate capitalization choices.

EDIT:Apparently you can use redirects for templates also, I didn't realize that until I tried to apply the same thing to Template:CSS and Template:Css. Currently CSS is the actual version and Css is a redirect to the all-caps version. So one of the two DODS templates should be a redirect to the other, and the preferred capitalization should be consistent between the DoD and CSS templates.

I'm not sure what standard you are using to determine which one is obsolete. The DODS template is much older than the Dods template but that doesn't mean one of them is better than the other. The CSS template started out at Css but was moved several years ago and Css was turned into a redirect into CSS.

EDIT: I went ahead and went with the capitalized version since that was done with CSS, although with the redirect in place it really doesn't matter which one is used. I really think it's better to have both capitalizations be acceptable, it doesn't require us to change anything and doesn't force editors to do it a certain way in the future. Thelonesoldier 05:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Good morning. =)
The proper capitalization (according to Wikipedia) would probably be "DoDS" (or even "DoD:S"), but I figured "Dods" would be more intuitive. I don't have more rationale than that - I'm fine with DODS being the one we keep. I understand why it's called "CSS" and not "Css" because it's not called "Counter-strike: source". (While that would probably be more proper english, the developers went with "Counter-Strike: Source".
I don't like duplicate templates, though, because they make the templates harder to overlook, especially if we're going to attempt some form of organization. Before you told me that you could simply redirect templates, the text was there in order to encourage a standard for those users who were curious enough to look up the templates.
--MossyBucket (formerly Andreasen) 12:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)