Template talk:Date table sorting/testcases

It seems pointless to put blank rows in a sortable table!--Patrick (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The table was sortable before I got here; personally I don't see why it should be sortable. Also, the blank rows are not noticeable if there are no lines to separate rows. Gary King (talk) 17:23, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read Template:Dts! Sortability is the main purpose!--Patrick (talk) 21:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, well now you're talking about the examples and not the actual template. The examples should be broken up into three tables for each format, to begin with, as it doesn't make much sense to be sorting different formats of the template. Gary King (talk) 01:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the single table demonstrates that even with mixed formats the sorting is correctly by date.--Patrick (talk) 22:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whether it demonstrates it or not, when this template is used in practice, the different formats should not be mixed. Gary King (talk) 03:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of the mixed table of Template:Dts/examples is to demonstrate that even with mixed formats the sorting works correctly. It is not meant as an example of a nice-looking table that uses Template:Dts, because consistent formatting looks better. For that purpose separate tables could be added.--Patrick (talk) 05:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]