Tardis talk:Italics

Classic Era, not Hartnell Era

The section at the top of this page mentions the Hartnell Era. To me, this strongly suggests the era of the show when the current Doctor was the First Doctor. However, the context suggests it should refer to the classic era as a whole. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 18:01, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Actually never mind. This page is referring to when episodes in a serial had individual names which wasn't the case for most of the classic series. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 18:09, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

A bodge to make the highlighted rows in the table work

Suggest implementing a purely visual edit analogous to this one at Help:Editing, to make the table work on both light mode and dark mode. This would consist of replacing the "background-color" value #d69e87 with the #RRGGBBAA value #ad481f80 (i.e. #ad481f at 0.5 transparency) throughout the page. It's quick, it's easy and it's free! I haven't implemented it yet for the sole reason that this page is edit-locked. (I might be wrong to do that, though, see Counterarguments.)

Reasoning

Currently, the table's highlighted rows have a contrast ratio of 1.37:1 on dark mode — and are probably not intended to look like that at all, just looking at it! My proposal would rate at 6.15:1 on dark mode, which is definitely more comparable to the 3.07:1 on light mode.

Technique

In general, the RGB components of the new colour are the colour such that the difference between it and the light-mode background (#fff4ef) is k times the difference between the latter and the original "highlight" background colour (#d69e87); the alpha (transparency) component is 256/k. In this particular case, k = 2, because for k = 4, 8, etc. the new colour would have a component outside the 0-255 range, and for all this to be exact k has to divide 256. (At Help:Editing I chose k = 8.)

All this math ensures that this looks literally identical in light mode because of how browsers render transparency.

Counterarguments

• I'm actually not sure if any CSS really should be used in this way (to highlight something locally with a specific colour). My solution here keeps all the drawbacks of that. It's tied to the particular themes of this wiki at this point, so it's not very robust (though, not less robust than what's there right now, for sure).

• This particular case is also ... not very high-contrast in general even in the intended variation?

• The #RRGGBBAA colour format I propose to use has also been supported in most browsers since only around 2020, based on a cursory glance. This might be an issue.

So, I would be equally happy if the whole practice of highlighting stuff locally with CSS were rejected and/or just generally reworked — for example, in favour of a "highlighted-in-table" CSS class which the wiki theme would then style in particular ways — with the result universally applied wherever this kind of issue is found. But as a quick fix — this works, probably.

jsmith5504^{talk to me} 19:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I've implemented this a quick fix. In the future, I will look into better ways of doing this across the whole wiki. Bongo50 ☎ 20:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)