This template is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
Currently, the check mark is a .png image file, while the X mark is a unicode character. I think it would be better to be consistent; either do {{aye}} → Y and {{nay}} → N, or do {{y&}} → ✓ and {{n&}} → ✗. Which style would be preferable? Here's a table of the different Wikipedia check mark templates; the check-mark and X-mark used ought to be in the same row:
Most of the templates above are fully sortable in a class="sortable" table (each check mark is assigned an undisplayed "Y" and each cross mark an undisplayed "N").
For now I'm going to switch the check marks over to Unicode. Like I said above, a consistent formatting makes the most sense to me, and this seems like the best option in lieu of a discussion on the matter. GreatBigDot (talk) 15:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Problems
Just saw this template for the first time. It needs work.
"All relations are transitive" That's certainly not true. All the types of relations listed in the table are transitive.
"... and irreflexive" That's complete nonsense. The relations in the table are almost all reflexive, and thus not irreflexive (unless the domain is empty).
Actually, for the order relations, whether they are reflexive or not is a matter of choice of definition; one can use either a strict or non-strict comparison. As it is, it seems very strange for lattices to not be called reflexive while semilattices are.
The first time I saw it, his template appeared as garbage on my screen. After many minutes of experimentation, I made it viewable by reducing text size until it fit. Other readers should not have this much difficulty seeing this otherwise valuable table. What can be done to fix this problem? Comfr (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On further testing, it is broken because of the gadget "Make headers of tables display as long as the table is in view, i.e. "sticky" (requires Chrome v91+, Firefox v59+, or Safari)" (js, css). @TheDJ not sure if you know about this. Jack who built the house (talk) 19:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's due to incorrect usage of nested tables. The gadget needs proper structure and doesn't care (and cannot know) about how someone made things 'look pretty'. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]