It is currently Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:45 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:33 am
Posts: 3715
Location: Central Texas, USA
Having three on a line is annoying because it requires a wider browser window. Is there any way we can have them wrap on narrower windows?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 3:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:12 pm
Posts: 19122
Location: NE Indiana, USA (NTSC)
They showed up fine three-across on Chrome on Ubuntu 10.10 on my netbook, maximized in a 1024-pixel-wide screen. But then its replacement for Courier New might have different metrics from the authentic Courier New seen on a Windows box.

There are ways of putting boxes side-by-side but letting boxes drop to another row on a narrow display. Most of these involve display:inline-block. I could create a template to apply a variant of inline-block that also works in outdated IE, but because of how MediaWiki handles the | character (which has to be escaped as &#124;), ASCII art diagrams don't work so well inside templates. But fortunately, just using <pre style="display:inline-block"> appears to work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 3:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:33 am
Posts: 3715
Location: Central Texas, USA
tepples wrote:
They showed up fine three-across on Chrome on Ubuntu 10.10 without any problem.

Even with a narrow browser window? Does it move the third pinout below the first two?

Is there something magic about three pinouts across? In other words, will there be cases in the future where you want four across? It seems that two across is a good limit that fits comfortably in narrower browser windows.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:38 pm
Posts: 1517
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
I see that you want to make the information "right" by cleaning stuff here and there but the JEDEC pinout, even thought it was defined under konami pinout (because I didn't know more about the subject), should still exist in the wiki since it has it utility. I don't even know where is the proper place to find that information on the net. When you make a VRC6/7 dev cart, this is useful information to have.

So I hope you were all planning to at least define the jedec pinout on the wiki right? The goal of the wiki is to share information, not to remove it, right?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:12 pm
Posts: 19122
Location: NE Indiana, USA (NTSC)
Banshaku wrote:
I see that you want to make the information "right" by cleaning stuff here and there but the JEDEC pinout, even thought it was defined under konami pinout (because I didn't know more about the subject), should still exist in the wiki since it has it utility.

It's still there, in "Mask ROM pinout" under "27C010/020/040/80 EPROM pinout".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 8:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:38 pm
Posts: 1517
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
Thank you for the clarification you made on the wiki. I didn't know the relationship.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 9:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7235
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
Thank you very much tepples for fixing my version of the article.

For me multiple pinouts in a row is a dream coming true. It makes it SO much easier to compare them, and see what is different. Now anyone can easily compare EPROM pinouts and Nintendo's mask ROMs pinouts in an eye of blink. Before you'd have to scroll up and down, and this was terrible.

Of course if you have to scroll left and right I understand this is a problem as well but then I guess your monitor is REALLY small. On my 14' notebook, there is a lot of margin with 3 pinouts side-by-side. In fact I hesitated to place the MMC5 pinouts aside with them (5 pinouts) but decided this was too large, and that MMC5 boards were rare enough to fit a separate section.

But since apparently tepples fixed the problem (thank you), I guess it's all right now.

Quote:
The goal of the wiki is to share information, not to remove it, right?

Of course it is ! The goals of the changes I and tepples were making are to spread the same information on less pages than it originally was, so that it's easier to browse. Of course if anything goes wrong (like the non-clarity of what was a JEDEC pinout), please just say it so we can improve/fix the thing. (or if you have an idea to make the wiki better, just go ahead and modify it).

By the way, anyone who have boards such as SL1ROM, TL1ROM, RROM, etc... with an different pinout should check it out and put it on the wiki. I don't have any of these unfortunately.

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 4:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:33 am
Posts: 3715
Location: Central Texas, USA
Bregalad wrote:
Of course if you have to scroll left and right I understand this is a problem as well but then I guess your monitor is REALLY small.

Or you use a 1920x1080 monitor and would like to have room for more than just a web browser and a little extra space on the sides.

Quote:
For me multiple pinouts in a row is a dream coming true. It makes it SO much easier to compare them, and see what is different. Now anyone can easily compare EPROM pinouts and Nintendo's mask ROMs pinouts in an eye of blink.

If this was the main goal, what about presenting the information in a different format? You could have three (or more) columns of pin names on either side of the chip, allowing easier comparison than the current setup. I've added an example of this. I tried making it as a table, but that didn't handle well, so I just made it into an ASCII picture like the others.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10068
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
blargg wrote:
You could have three (or more) columns of pin names on either side of the chip, allowing easier comparison than the current setup. I've added an example of this.

I have always done that whenever I needed to rewire carts. It makes the differences much clearer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:38 pm
Posts: 1517
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
Good to see that the wiki has activity on it. Hopefully I will be able to return to do some nesdeving someday.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 3:27 am
Posts: 178
Location: Slovakia
Maybe this is already in process of implementation, but if not, this page
http://wiki.nesdev.com/w/index.php/VRC2_pinout
should be populated with info from this topic
http://nesdev.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=3489


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7235
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
Quote:
Or you use a 1920x1080 monitor and would like to have room for more than just a web browser and a little extra space on the sides.

No offense, but do you oppose anything I do just for the heck of it ?? This argument makes no sense. You can enlarge the window to look at the pinout whenever you want. Nobody forces you to use only a small part of your screen. This argument makes absolutely zero sense. I really feel like you are trying to annoy me for a vengeance or something, but I might be completely wrong. I'd just rather say that than over-react or anything. (remembers me how some political parties in my country systematically oppose to projects of adversary political parties just for the heck of it, no matter what the project it).

Quote:
You could have three (or more) columns of pin names on either side of the chip, allowing easier comparison than the current setup. I've added an example of this.

Well I hesitate. How you made it is pretty interesting, it allows to have multiple pinouts on a single diagram (instead of multiple diagrams) which is even better in therms of compacting things. However, with already the signals in backets for unused adress pins, it becomes maybe a bit too much ?
In this example the pinout is the same for the 3 cases (EPROM, PRG-ROM and CHR-ROM), but this is not the case for larger sizes. Therefore, a similar diagram, where differences only are shown is interesting, as opposed to make them in bolt.

Pesonally I'd leave thing either as my/tepples diagrams-in-a-table or Blargg's compact diagrams, but definitely not both on the same page, as it looks retarded to have redundant info.

Any other opinions on which one is better ?

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:12 pm
Posts: 19122
Location: NE Indiana, USA (NTSC)
I'm starting to warm up to blargg's layout.

People who use a 1920x1080 monitor with the "snap" feature of Windows 7 or the "tile vertically" feature of previous Windows versions have a 960px window, which is just a tad narrower than the 1024px of a netbook or a 17" desktop monitor.

And I've discovered that operating system matters. My Ubuntu netbook uses a substitution for Courier New that's slightly smaller than the authentic Courier New that I see on my Windows machine. Three diagrams in the 128-512 section line up across in Ubuntu but not in Windows.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:33 am
Posts: 3715
Location: Central Texas, USA
Bregalad wrote:
Quote:
Or you use a 1920x1080 monitor and would like to have room for more than just a web browser and a little extra space on the sides.

No offense, but do you oppose anything I do just for the heck of it ?? This argument makes no sense.

Just because the way I use a computer, with multiple windows open at once, is foreign to you doesn't mean I simply object to things for the hell of it, FFS. I don't know if you've ever used a desk before, but usually you have multiple things sitting on its surface, and you refer to one or more while you're working on another. It's the same with a computer. They have windows on screen and they can overlap, be resized, and be rearranged so that there are multiple visible at once. Sorry to be explaining this, but I get the idea you use your computer with only one window filling the entire screen at once. When I used to have a small monitor, I'd have to do that since there wasn't much room for more than one window, but it was pure tedium, constantly switching between windows. With a larger display, I can put things side-by-side and not constantly switch windows. Web pages which demand a really wide browser window suck, and I don't want the wiki to suck like that. Almost always, information can be presented in a way that doesn't require a really wide page. By doing that, more styles of browsing can be accommodated.

Quote:
I really feel like you are trying to annoy me for a vengeance or something,

Likewise. The way you respond makes it seem like you dismiss anyone else's problems if they aren't a problem for you. That is not the way to design a website that's meant for others than yourself.

Quote:
Pesonally I'd leave thing either as my/tepples diagrams-in-a-table or Blargg's compact diagrams, but definitely not both on the same page, as it looks retarded to have redundant info.

Indeed, I merely added the compact one so we could decide the best approach. I do NOT think the individual pinouts should be removed from the Wiki entirely. If one wants the pinout of a PRG ROM, one does not want any other information cluttering it. That may go on a different page that's not specifically comparing pinouts, but it should go somewhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7235
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
Quote:
It's the same with a computer.

Sorry it really isn't. An IRL desktop isn't made of windows and you doesn't browse it with a mouse.
Quote:
Sorry to be explaining this, but I get the idea you use your computer with only one window filling the entire screen at once.

You bet it.
Quote:
With a larger display, I can put things side-by-side and not constantly switch windows. Web pages which demand a really wide browser window suck, and I don't want the wiki to suck like that. Almost always, information can be presented in a way that doesn't require a really wide page. By doing that, more styles of browsing can be accommodated.

I didn't state the opposite, and that's exactly why tepples fixed is so that it's not REQUIRED to have a large windows.
It's required only if you want to compare the pinouts, and then it really costs you NOTHING (remember that thread about costs ?) to double-click on the main bar of your browser window to temporarly make it full screen to compare them. If moving your mouse and double clicking is that much of an issue, then you can't use a computer at all.

So I don't know what you're crying about, why you absolutely refuse to enlarge this window.

Even if you had such as small screen so that an enlarged window can't even show the full thing, most browsers can allow you to resize the page with Ctr + and Ctr - keys.

And if you're that much pissed about my diagrams to be too wide, then you should also be pissed about the toolbar to be on the left when it could be on the top and not take any width.

Quote:
Indeed, I merely added the compact one so we could decide the best approach. I do NOT think the individual pinouts should be removed from the Wiki entirely. If one wants the pinout of a PRG ROM, one does not want any other information cluttering it. That may go on a different page that's not specifically comparing pinouts, but it should go somewhere.


The whole point of this thread was to remove duplications of information on the wiki and make info more compact on less pages.
Your way of displaying diagrams is more compact, I'll give you that, so I'd agree to use it on the page. But then the old way should be deleted - it would be crazy to have diagrams in multiple format because people can't agree which one is the "right" one.

BTW even your diagrams takes some width, about 2/3 as much as mines.

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group