z929669

I see you created a TOC limit template, but how do you intend it to work (see talk page)

Gstaff replied in a good way on the forum thread you linked ... please share broadly for the record. Arthmoor may be interested. I think we are good to go with distributing a DDSopt-ed bundle of the vanilla textures, but I am awaiting an explicit 'yes' pertaining to STEP's use (he basically responded 'yes' by proxy of the thread post though).

OK, NOW I see it ... I just did not zoom in enough o_O Very strange. I have not seen this before. It looks like a brick wall pattern superimposed on mid-distance landscapes --but not rocks, trees, water or sky-- so it is probably a LOD issue or something to do with the terrain textures. To rule out video-card artifacting, I would test with unaltered versions of all terrain textures. Is Terrain Bump installed? Could you remove any mods that provide terrain and see if this persists? EDIT: Seems like video card artifacts. Probably not INI settings. Load up Vanilla Oblivion or Fallout if you have them and check there.

Can you provide a pointer or two? I guess I am blind and/or my work monitor sucks, because I can't see any lines at all :P (I even downloaded the image and am looking at it in better detail)

I have received an initial respons from Gstaff. It looks promising, but he/she/they are soliciting others for the appropriate response just to be safe.

I just don't see any horizontal lines in these images ... Can you upload better examples? Perhaps it is a monitor issue?

@alt3rn1ty I appended my PM with the additional request, so we'll see. It may be quite awhile before he/she/they stumble(s) upon my PM though.

I agree personally; although, strictly speaking, any distributed modification of the original textures is not legal, and Beth could legally move to act and win. Copyright law dictates that derivative work is still a copyright infringement (X + Y = X + Y != Z). One must create something completely new from scratch (X != Z). That said, I also think it is 'safe' and Beth will allow it, but it would be nice to get the permission straight from Gstaff (I have a PM pending ... just sent).

Thanks for providing these solutions!

I stand by this post 100%. Remember, we have been thinking about this stuff for nearly three years, so all would do well to study the Data Dictionary of our Semantic Mediawiki implementation of Mods and Packs in particular. Please discuss or add input on the above-linked DD Talk page All Pack-Mod-centric information needs to be consolidated on the page I linked in order to be implemented (so that we all know what is going on and why). A forum is just too convoluted for consolidating ideas. Let's get all of the good ideas onto that Talk page and revise the Packs tab in particular as necessary. Even if you just want to add links to posts over here on the forums ... THAT IS FINE. Just please help us to consolidate on the wiki (I am way too immersed in RL to take that on myself ATM). At some point, I will tidy up the wiki page and consolidate everything neatly. In short: Mod Template (i.e., mod pages) should contain all common, static mod-specific info about a given mod. These pages are absolutely necessary to driving the wiki for just about any implementation that is desireable. No getting around creating mod pages, so bite the bullet and get them created as necessary. They will NEVER go away Pack Template should contain all common, static pack-specific info about a given pack. Like mods, pack pages will never go away, but we can drastically change them to suit the needs of Pack usersGuide Templates bring Mod/pack info together, and we could have more than one type of template even to produce whatever guide style is wanted.Versioning or tracking of other changing information associated with specific Mods/Packs/Guides (conflict res, instructions, version #s, patches, etc.) will need to be handled as Semantic sub-objects or some other method that is scaleable and practically maintainable.Anyone interested in helping out needs to learn about Semantic Mediawiki. A prerequisite is a decent understanding of wiki markup in general as well as template creation and maintenance. Lastly, anyone interested in helping with development of the SMW infrastructure as actual devs or just those willing to propose viable ideas and contribute in an organized way (this is you Nearox and Smile, et al.), please PM admin to get access to the DD forum thread and Pack implementation forum thread and get ready to read a lot of historic info.

It should be pretty simple to change the collaps 'button' to be an image left-justified rather than be a [word]. It would require modifying the applicable server-side js I think. S4n would probably know how to do this much more quickly than I.

We have recently discovered that much of the wiki content is collapsible, which will be useful for much of our wiki content like "Detailed Instructions" in the main guide and text-box sidebars in other guides. Wiki editors can surely make use of collapsible content in order to trim down guides and hide info that may be suited to only a small proportion of the target audience. Take a look at the details on how to implement. (thansk to hishutup for instigating our investigation into this topic)

Param 3 is the caption and would show in the lower left of the frame depicting the video. There is no brake built into the video template, but the RelatedVideo template uses bullets, which act as breaks between the Video template calls. You can do: {{Video|j4ZQpzf_iAE|This is the title|This is the caption}} {{Video|j4ZQpzf_iAE|This is the title|This is the caption}}or: * {{Video|j4ZQpzf_iAE|This is the title|This is the caption}}* {{Video|j4ZQpzf_iAE|This is the title|This is the caption}}or a break could easily be added ... or use: {{clear}}... or a could be added to the template, but that would require changes to RelatedVideo template.

Wow, I became very confused in looking at your User: template page before reading on but then saw that you did employ the #tag parser function in a way that made sense. Nice work! I knew there must be a way, but I did not explore all of the magic words links that kept beckoning me in my searches for a solution :P ... glad you hunted down the method. Isn't 'programming' in wiki fun? Now, off with you to the SMW tutorials!

Unfortunately, I cannot find a way to incorporate symbols into the template without either screwing up the template calls or rendering the embedded YT HTML tags useless (e.g., using < or >). I even tried creating templates for the symbols, but same problems. If there is a way to do this, I have not found it other than possibly using a beta extension that s4n will not want us to use, due to security risk. You might also want to play with the embedvideo plugin: {{#ev:youtube|NnvZok9J3Qw|200|left|caption}}

Could you show an example of how/where this might be used on the wiki and place this info on the template page? Just trying to envision when/why/how to employ ... also, you should probably move it to "RelatedVideos" and edit accordingly.

Welcome back neko!

I will take a look at all of this ... This page contains all of our consolidated ideas about the guides, mods and Packs from a SMW viewpoint and should be the hub for all proposals. In the meantime, see this page and consider all of the elements and ramifications. mod pages are necessary in order to maintain the Semantic attributes that drive the STEP Guide and also any forthcoming Pack motif that we settle on. @ Nearox and Smile Thanks for the great suggestions. S4n and I can consider all of this stuff and mock something up once we are finished with the RL stuff consuming our time lately. I cannot provide any ETA, but it would be most helpful if we could get others informed about the mechanics of Semantic Mediawiki and tentatively set up some regular times to meet and discuss in real time via Mumble.

This mod is down from the Nexus for some reason. I have contacted the author for more info.

Although we don't encourage this for maintenance/scale-ability reasons, it can be done ...

We don't allow members to see who voted up/down on posts due to cat fights that would undoubtedly erupt. The member that did this did so without justifiable cause and has been formally warned. @redirishlord Unfortunately, there is no way to alter votes given by any member AFAIK, so they do stick. It looks like you are positive again due to some community kindness, but we don't advocate mercy voting just as we reject malicious down voting. Rep systems are limited and should not always be taken at face value. That said, the system is a decent indicator of member "likeability-by-consensus", and I'd say that it is working in this case still, although there was an unfair anomaly (which your fans seem to have corrected). Happy posting, and thanks for contributing

The wiki is driven by Semantic MediaWiki (SMW), so only admins can mess with the logistics of the guide and anything driven by SMW. If you want to consolidate mod info, you can use a SMW query to do so (a special template like "MergedModOrderedList" and dependencies would first need to be created though if this info is managed by mod page attributes): =Example: STEP Mods merged into the STEP Patch(es) ={| class="wikitable" style="width:100%;"! style="width:25%;" | Mod Name! style="width:10%;" | Section! style="width:10%;" | SourceID! style="width:55%;" | SourceURL{{#ask:[[Concept:ModsInSTEP]]|mainlabel=-|?ModName|?Section|link=none|format=template|template=MergedModOrderedList|sort=OrderID|limit=1000}}|} I have been away for awhile though, so I am not sure how "LOOT Meta Rules" are configured or if SMW even manages. You can easily create a list or a table on your user page or anywhere else though, just can't change the Guide itself or any of its dependencies.

I don't seem to have this problem, but I may not notice it either. It is most likely a Tapatalk issue, although we may have an update available for the site as well

Added

Our entire site is open for discussing things. Mod and Pack forums exist as well as many others for these purposes. the MA forum (invisible to all but MAs, MT,s and site staff) is for behind-the-scenes discussions amongst MAs, who are the only ones that can start topics. There are plenty of good reasons to keep it private and restrictive and no really good reasons to open it up, given the real estate that already exists on these forums This does not contrast with the idea of open modding ... it is simply a perk for MAs prior to going public with an ideology.