Template talk:Optical disc

Images and overlap

Can we have somekind of image on top of the infobox because many of the stuff listed (i.e. Blu-ray, cd) got their own logo that we can feature on the infobox instead?
Some topics overlaps with {{Audio format}}. Should we merge the two together?

''F3-R4'' 18:09, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reducing content

Its my opinion that this template is becoming too cluttered with every addition of recordable DVD. I would like to propose that current content be reduced to simply "DVD" and that more knowledgeable editors create a new template exclusively for all variants of the DVD format.--Kenn Caesius 20:43, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed very cluttered, and so wide that it makes the real content of articles hard to read on smaller screen resolutions (or when your browser window doesn't occupy the whole screen). An alternative is to convert it to a horizontal navbox and have it at the bottom of articles instead, like the majority of navboxes work. But something has to be done. -- intgr 11:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UMD

Why wasn't UMD featured on this template? I'm going to add UMD to the list as this is an optical format. I'll also add it to the article. Any comments? Alex43223^{Talk | Contribs | E-mail | C} 04:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HD DVD a subset of DVD?

Why is HD DVD listed as a subset of DVD? I see no reason for this at all and I will change it. Thingg (talk) 21:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Holographic and 3-D types

I removed two so-called media types because they do not seem to fit with the other types listed: the other types appear to be actually commercially available.

However, please revert me if this template is intended to list future types as well, or if there are such products on the market. Some guidance as to what the inclusion criteria would be helpful. The holographic and 3D articles cover a technology in development rather than a product which has been developed, specified and is in daily use. -Wikianon (talk) 16:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bolding of the Discontinued Optical Disc Formats section

I had noticed that the Discontinued Optical Disc Formats section was all bolded and it makes the section look weird in comparison to the rest of the template. Is there any way to fix this? Haseo9999 (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -- intgr [talk] 19:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does PD-ROM belong here?

Phase-change Dual was a commercial flop but laid much of the groundwork for what became CD-RW, if I understand correctly. Since the drives were compatible with standard CD media too, I think PD belongs in this box, but I'm not a very involved wikipedian so I don't feel confident editing it myself. If someone concurs, please add the link! -- Myself248 (talk) 07:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Title

I just changed the title of the template from "Optical disc authoring" to just "Optical discs". The template is used for much more than just authoring and I thought the title was too descriptive. Other suggestions are welcome as well, obviously. --Reinoutr (talk) 11:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Change to navbox

This list box has become far too large for my preference. I suggest converting it to a navbox format. If no one objects I can work on the conversion myself. Ham Pastrami (talk) 15:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no objection. This was also discussed a few years ago and there was no objection then either. I encourage anyone to make the change. I'd do it myself if I had some template chops. --Kvng (talk) 14:13, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Specify a section to show

By default all sections are hidden. It would be nice to be able to specify a section to be open. Example {{Optical disc authoring|Standards=visible}}. -- Frap (talk) 11:48, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]