Template talk:ItemNav/sandbox

So yeah, i wanted to try a tiered version of ItemNav without messing up the original template. How do you all feel about it? Can something from this be used to improve the original ItemNav?

Pros:
 * Nice and organized in tiers

Cons:
 * It is taller than the original
 * The font size is smaller due to the third nested navbox

Other stuff and concerns:
 * Removed Vines because it is a legacy item and is no longer available
 * Should Biomass have only one entry or should it have four across different tiers for leaves+wood, mycelia, carapace and organs? Technically they are not alt recipes (you can craft them by hand), but at the same time it is the same item, but these recipes unlock at different tiers. In the original ItemNav there're two entries (leaves+wood+mycelia and carapace, no entry for organs)
 * Maybe it is better to remove separation by stage (Establishment, Development, Expansion) and leave only tiers? They take up space and without them the font size of the items would be larger. They represent the Space Elevator delivery stages though, so they are not completely useless.

Thoughts?

--SerGreen (talk) 22:45, 2 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I like it. In particular, adding the Tier rows gives height to the Stage sections, so they can trade some width for height without looking weird, which results in the whole of the row titles being narrower, which is good for mobile. The Stages are a little redundant given the Tiers, but they do add a nice touch and if they were removed, those rows would no longer line up neatly with the Resource section above them, so I think they can stay. I would reorganize the rows to be alphabetical, so that particular items are easier to find, especially if the user doesn't know their tier.
 * As for the height issue, we could split tools into its own nav. The smaller font-size can also be changed with css. --Mr Pie 5 (talk) 20:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * >we could split tools into its own nav
 * I don't think we should because:
 * Tools are technically items too
 * We would want to have both items and tools navs at the bottom of pretty much every page anyways
 * If we move tools to their own nav, we won't need Tools navbox section there, it will only be Stages and Tiers sections, so the rows won't align with ones from Items nav
 * As for the alphabetical order, i have some doubts about its practicality compared to the thematically grouped order (i.e. where silica is next to the aluminum ingots and where simpler items precede more complex ones). But i guess it is indeed a more ordered and encyclopedic way of doing things, so i'll make them alphabetic and we'll then see how good or bad it looks. EDIT: Pretty good i'd say. --SerGreen (talk) 21:26, 4 July 2019 (UTC)