Template talk:Clear

Why not br clear?
Why don't you use  ? ~iNVERTED | Rob (Talk | Contribs) 17:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Because MediaWiki's software often encapsulates that into an (otherwise empty) paragraph. Often there's nothing that can be done about that and it tends to look ugly. Also, a paragraph should be exactly that: a paragraph. Shinobu 17:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The br element has nothing to do with paragraphs; I think you are thinking of the p element. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 13:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * - contains that markup. Tcrow777  talk  04:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And for br uses (when they are desired) it should be  (or   or   more specifically); the   HTML (as opposed to CSS) parameter is deprecated. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93;  ‹(-¿-)› 13:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Stuck Section
Test

Unstuck Section
Test


 * It &#91;br clear="all"&#93; appears to work for this scenario, anyone else? —  xaosflux  Talk 01:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, but see above for why it is not used. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 13:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

A similar problem
Please have a look at Dervish. The Commons template overlaps with the translations table. Any suggestions? Wikipeditor 23:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Same at zh:陰城郡, if viewed at large font sizes.


 * Somewhat fixed them. (I simply moved them up in the code) However, I do find these [edit] links very misplaced. --Sébastien Leblanc ( Talk 20:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Difference between and
What is the difference between  and ? -PatPeter 19:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Look at top of this page for the explanation. -- drini [meta:][commons:] 01:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't subst
I think this template should not be substituted into articles. Many editors won't understand the purpose of the resulting HTML, however if they see a template they can find out what is used for. -- Patleahy (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Concur. The developers have said many times that WPians needs to stop worrying about server load, and the amount of server load this template will introduce by not being transcluded is incredibly negligible. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 13:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Empty div syntax
Is there any reason why it is not ? This would require less bandwidth and not require the browser to set up a CDATA in the DOM that turns out to be empty. John Vandenberg 01:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Because some browsers don't recognize XHTML-style self-closing tags, so that would result in those browsers seeing a never-closed div. Even modern browsers can do this in some circumstances. Anomie 17:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * MediaWiki would turn it into the expanded syntax anyways. Ms2ger (talk) 16:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Then it might as well use the shorter syntax, just to keep the code leaner. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 13:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone actually look at the result?
So someone developed another "cool" program. But the resulting page layouts look like a third-grader did them. There is no style, no artistic merit. Sometimes programmers need to have their computers disabled so that people who know what a page layout is actually supposed to look like can do a good job. "Clear" wiki is a miserable "tool". It's like using a hammer to put a staple in your term paper. And to answer your question, NO, It doesn't look better. (Taivo (talk) 11:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC))
 * Man, deal. Clear helps with overlapping hidden section and serves as a method for uninitiated users to order images and text.  If you don't like the tool, write a new one. Protonk (talk) 05:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I dunno, my user page uses this template to keep the User committed identity at the bottom of my page. It works pretty well, if you ask me... Graham (talk, contrib, SIGN HERE!!!) 23:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Options
This should have left and right options, defaulting to both. There are cases where one might want to use one or other. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 13:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * and do currently provide this functionality, although it would make sense to merge the templates –  looks much nicer doesn't it? What I would personally like to see is a "clear and drop by..." option, to allow control of the spacing after clearing the left and/or right columns. It's not hard to do, for example adding     would clear both columns and then add a margin of 10px past the base of both columns. It would also allow editors to easily space out objects such as tables without being confined to standardised line breaks;  is more compact and neat than the aforementioned code. I may try building such a template if no consensus exists to modify this one – Ikara talk → 00:35, 27 September 2008 (UTC)