Template talk:TOCleft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Purpose

{{TOCleft}}

This template forces the auto-generated Table of Contents for an article to appear in a table that is floated to the left side of the page, in order to improve article layout.

[edit] Usage

Insert {{TOCleft}} at the point in the article where you want the top of the Table of Contents box to appear.

[edit] Example and cautions

Contents 1 Purpose 2 Usage 3 Example and cautions 4 History 5 Discussion 6 table vs div 7 Distracting blank spaces 8 Template criticisms

<-- look to the left

Note that this template should not be used when the result is to place the TOC in a visually poor location. A TOC that crosses a section division is probably a poor idea, if that can be avoided.

Unless the section in which the {{TOCleft}} is placed is long enough, the result may well be undesirable. Note particularly that if the TOC is floated left of a bulleted list, the bullets will be hidden.

An MOS entry on when to use this template, and the parallel template {{TOCright}} would probably be a good idea. A discussion is now (as of 7 July 2005) in progress at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Template:TOCright.

In general, it is probably better to insert {{TOCleft}} after the lead section, or at least the first paragraph.

[edit] History

• Created 5 July 2005 by User:DESiegel
• Documented 5 July 2005 by User:DESiegel
• Created in response to the discussion of TOCright on TfD and elsewhere.
• Changed style statement to match what would be seen for a floating image, which uses the "thumb tleft" classes. 7 July 2005 by Mike

[edit] Discussion

Couple of comments. I think a floating left TOC is an excellent addition to Wikipedia - in fact, I think articles should really only use floating TOCs, either right or left, except in the case of very short TOCs when the standard wiki TOC is best. Of course, the ban-TOC-templates cabal is likely to outlaw both, so all talk of preferences will likely be mute.

Two observations. In IE 6.0.2 1024x768 WinXP, with the Monobook skin, there is a thin white line below the left TOC, as seen on your discussion page. In Firefox 1.0.4, with the Classic skin, the text next to the TOC directly abuts the table, which is very ugly.

Solutions?--219.93.174.109 6 July 2005 13:57 (UTC)

I adjusted the format to match what you would get with a floated image. They use classes "thumb tleft", but those classes can't be used directly for this template. I pulled out the CSS elements which produce the desired effect. —Mike July 7, 2005 07:17 (UTC)

This template should only be used when absolutely necessary, i.e. pages with very long TOCs. People who want to see the TOC float left all the time should edit their user CSS. Do not start putting this hack on every page you come across. ed g2s • talk 14:16, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] table vs div

Something wrong with the div version? Looked exactly the same to me. ¦ Reisio 23:12, 2005 August 8 (UTC)

Then why did you change it to begin with? I did find in one case (back when these floating TOCs were first created) that using a div could create unusual results with how the table of contents was formatted. But I don't know if it was a minor 'bug' that may have disappeared in subsequent wiki software releases. What the table with its current formatting is designed to do is to create a space between it and the regular column of text, like what you would see with an image, as opposed to what you usually see with infoboxes. There is a difference when viewed with the monobook skin. —Mike 23:44, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Then why did you change it to begin with?

Because the data is not tabular. See also Wikipedia:How_to_use_tables.

There is a difference when viewed with the monobook skin.

What difference? I've already said it looked exactly the same to me.

¦ Reisio 03:39, 2005 August 9 (UTC)

True, it isn't data, but the software itself uses a table for the TOC. View the HTML source code for any page with a regular TOC and you will see a table surrounding the TOC list. For the difference between using the div instead of a table, see Image:TOCright line.PNG for an example (using the right floated TOC). The border under the heading touches the left side of the TOC. Using the table to pad the TOC creates a space between them as happens with floated images. This doesn't happen with other skins because they don't have borders under the major headings. —Mike 00:50, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

True, it isn't data, but the software itself uses a table for the TOC.

This is irrelevant (except for the fact that that, too, should be changed).

For the difference between using the div instead of a table, see Image:TOCright line.PNG

...how about the difference for TOCleft (not TOCright) - that's what this discussion is for, after all.

¦ Reisio 03:13, 2005 August 10 (UTC)

The difference is the same for right or left—but obviously the padding is on the opposite sides. —Mike 17:55, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Screenshot? ¦ Reisio 18:34, 2005 August 10 (UTC)

[edit] Distracting blank spaces

Formatting that encases the framed table of contents in text, in just the way a framed map or image is enclosed within the text, is now available: {{TOCleft}} in the HTML does the job.

Blank space opposite the ToC, besides being unsightly and distracting, suggests that there is a major break in the continuity of the text, which may not be the case. Blanks in page layout are voids and they have meanings to the experienced reader. The space betweeen paragraphs marks a brief pause between separate blocks of thought. A deeper space, in a well-printed text, signifies a more complete shift in thought: note the spaces that separate sub-headings in Wikipedia articles.

A handful of thoughtless and aggressive Wikipedians revert the "TOCleft" format at will. A particularly aggressive de-formatter is User:Ed g2s

The reader may want to compare versions at the various Page histories. --Wetman 20:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template criticisms

I dislike this template, and disagree with the above claims of the standard TOC being "unsightly and distracting". The lead section should not flow into the next section like chapters in a novel; it should be a summary of the article, able to stand on its own (see Wikipedia:Lead section), encouraging the reader to use the TOC that follows to expand upon a subject covered in the intro. I believe the white space is necessary to draw focus to the TOC in this manner.

There are also accessibility problems with having a floating TOC. Unlike images, which can be scaled down or edited to fit inline with the text, the width of the TOC cannot be specified, and its text does not wrap. In many articles, the TOC can be rather wide, due to long section titles and sub-sub-subsections. As an example, a past version of the Nintendo DS article [1] used the TOCleft template, which halved the width of the main text at 1152x864, and made it nearly unreadable at 800x600. Contrary to popular belief, many Internet users still own 15-inch monitors. --Poiuyt Man ^talk 06:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

The Nintendo DS article is still readable (and undoubtedly people at 800x600 are used to squashed-looking pages). It's no matter, however - if you think the TOC is too wide to float left...just don't float it left. There is, as ever, no substitute for human comprehension. (Incidentally, most of the headers for Nintendo DS look quite verbose.) It'd be really great if the left column was removed from the default look - it wastes a lot of space. ¦ Reisio 21:20, 2005 August 31 (UTC)