Talk:Post-Flash Site Update
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(→Year of update: reply) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
::::How about '''Post-Flash Update'''? That's what the Chaps call it [[hr:post-flash-update|here]]. {{User:Lira/sig}} 18:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC) | ::::How about '''Post-Flash Update'''? That's what the Chaps call it [[hr:post-flash-update|here]]. {{User:Lira/sig}} 18:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
:::::I like the "Flash End-of-Life Site Update" option. "Post-Flash Update" would be fine too assuming we don't plan to create an article on the Post-Flash Update page itself. "HTML5 Site Update" seems a bit weird to me, like it's a bit off the mark in terms of putting a name to the update. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 19:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC) | :::::I like the "Flash End-of-Life Site Update" option. "Post-Flash Update" would be fine too assuming we don't plan to create an article on the Post-Flash Update page itself. "HTML5 Site Update" seems a bit weird to me, like it's a bit off the mark in terms of putting a name to the update. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 19:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::::::"Post-Flash Update" sounds good (albeit potentially confusing since it's also the name of a page on the site). "Flash End-of-Life Site Update" is good too, but it's a bit long, so what about "End of Flash Update"? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig}} 20:45, 27 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:45, 27 January 2021
Year of update
Despite the fact that this update occurred on December 31, 2020, I'm wondering whether the page name should be 2021 Site Update. The update occurred late in the day and was made specifically because Flash was discontinued in 2021. — It's dot com 07:04, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Not to mention it did happen in 2021 across the Atlantic. I think a better name would the focus on it being the Ruffle and/or HTML5 update Guybrush20X6 08:46, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, this is a tough one. While it's true that everything happened awfully close to 2021 and Adobe's official wording of "after December 31, 2020" is vague at best, Wikipedia and some media outlets consider the EOL date to be December 31, 2020 or "end of 2020" (even though the January 12 date is also important). But the change itself happened on Dec 31 and that was my rationale for choosing that year for its title. EC Update: taking the year out of the name wouldn't be a bad idea. "Ruffle Site Update" isn't entirely accurate "Ruffle and/or HTML5 site update" might be a tad long ;) but "HTML5 Site Update" might work. Earlier while writing my response i thought of "Flash End-of-life Site Update" would be accurate but too wordy. If it wasn't for the 2020/2021 contention I'd be fine with the year. --Stux 09:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Given that it was barely in 2020, and that mentioning the date doesn't really tell us anything anyway, I'm onboard with a non-date approach. Further given that they likely never would have updated if Flash hadn't died, I like Flash EOL Site Update or Flash End-of-Life Site Update (it's long but maybe it's not that long), because that's why the update happened. I also moderately support HTML5 Site Update. I don't think Ruffle should be mentioned, since it could be swapped out for a better emulator tomorrow and the typical user wouldn't know the difference. — It's dot com 17:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- How about Post-Flash Update? That's what the Chaps call it here. Lira (talk) 18:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- I like the "Flash End-of-Life Site Update" option. "Post-Flash Update" would be fine too assuming we don't plan to create an article on the Post-Flash Update page itself. "HTML5 Site Update" seems a bit weird to me, like it's a bit off the mark in terms of putting a name to the update. DEI
DAT
VM
┌datvm center\super contra┘ 19:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- I like the "Flash End-of-Life Site Update" option. "Post-Flash Update" would be fine too assuming we don't plan to create an article on the Post-Flash Update page itself. "HTML5 Site Update" seems a bit weird to me, like it's a bit off the mark in terms of putting a name to the update. DEI
DAT
VM
- How about Post-Flash Update? That's what the Chaps call it here. Lira (talk) 18:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Given that it was barely in 2020, and that mentioning the date doesn't really tell us anything anyway, I'm onboard with a non-date approach. Further given that they likely never would have updated if Flash hadn't died, I like Flash EOL Site Update or Flash End-of-Life Site Update (it's long but maybe it's not that long), because that's why the update happened. I also moderately support HTML5 Site Update. I don't think Ruffle should be mentioned, since it could be swapped out for a better emulator tomorrow and the typical user wouldn't know the difference. — It's dot com 17:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, this is a tough one. While it's true that everything happened awfully close to 2021 and Adobe's official wording of "after December 31, 2020" is vague at best, Wikipedia and some media outlets consider the EOL date to be December 31, 2020 or "end of 2020" (even though the January 12 date is also important). But the change itself happened on Dec 31 and that was my rationale for choosing that year for its title. EC Update: taking the year out of the name wouldn't be a bad idea. "Ruffle Site Update" isn't entirely accurate "Ruffle and/or HTML5 site update" might be a tad long ;) but "HTML5 Site Update" might work. Earlier while writing my response i thought of "Flash End-of-life Site Update" would be accurate but too wordy. If it wasn't for the 2020/2021 contention I'd be fine with the year. --Stux 09:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
