Talk:Index of Effects, Generators and Analyzers

Ed 11Apr12PST: Could it be 4 columns? I think that would eliminate the blank spaces (below Chirp etc.). I also think it would look better on lower res monitors. Otherwise, I am completely happy with this.
 * Ed 10Apr12: I like this better as it is now an "index" not a summary--though note that in other places (e.g. the proposal page) where we do multi-column alphabetizing we do so vertically not horizontally. I would put this "index" (all links) right after the intro div on the non-talk page and get rid of everything below here from this page. Link the above stuff with no specific page to the appropriate place at the bottom of the non-talk page (in the "by function" section) for those effects where this is the only text.
 * Bill 10Apr12: Alpha by column is more difficult to create and maintain than alpha by row. I'm not sure which page you're referring to where we do a multi-column index alpha by vertical? If the above is to be a pure "index", then for effects that have no page I'd link to the section on the appropriate menu page, rather than index into the "by function" section.
 * Gale 11Apr12: ATM I think it makes most sense if the above list (to include generators and analyzers) goes at the top of the article page then the links to go to anchors on the page itself. Then people can see the context of other effects in the same functional category which is the point of the page. If size of the list is a concern, you could try a custom TOC with smaller font? +1 for vertical ordering of the list - the front page TOC items in each cell would be much better IMO ordered vertically and I think Peter agrees. Perhaps Ed has the Edit Menu list in mind, which is vertical.
 * Bill 12Apr12: Here is a 5-column list of all effects on this page, vertical style. When we're happy with this it can be transferred to the main page.
 * Gale 12Apr12: This is looking great to me. I am not fussed about number of columns but I do care about the cells being top aligned (done). Why not add some styling to make it look sweet? You could use table class="prettytablerows" or play with div class="note" colours in some way (as I've done to give you a few ideas).
 * Peter 13Apr12: Looking great to me too - a very useful addition.
 * Bill 14Apr12: I've just had a lesson on how mind-numbingly difficult it is to edit a vertical-alpha table in order to add or remove one element. Using the built-in wiki editor is just too frustrating (the editing window is too small). I used a simple text editor with two windows open and re-built the table by copying elements from the old table, one by one, into the right places in the new table. Part way through I realized that parts of rows still line up and could therefore transfer partial rows. Still, not an easy job. I hope we don't have to do this too often. A horizontal-alpha table would be much easier to edit.
 * Gale 14Apr12: Vertical is much better for the user, I feel. I would just use an HTML editor and be done with Wiki markup even if HTML is a few bytes more. Bill can decide whether to use my table or his for the alphabetical list. I took mine out of the note div. Bill's gives a more "gridlined" effect and maybe would be better with a less dark vertical divider for the "columns". It might be nice to use whatever we decide on elsewhere e.g. in the list at the top of Edit Menu.