Board Thread:Support Requests - Getting Technical/@comment-93604-20171120230817/@comment-9605025-20180130102004

reply to #40 Timeshifter wrote: Except this one shows no border color: That is because what you actually have in the table for the output cell is. - reply to #41 Dunnoob wrote: Minor nit, parser functions have a cost, there's a limit how many you can have per page. This snippet can be simplified:

. As has already been pointed out by Timeshifter and Fngplg, the current version of the template doesn't use any expensive parser functions so the limit is irrelevant. As for loading times, I believe Timeshifter has a valid point in. I am not sure why you bring up  in. I don't remember if they fixed it yet but a long standing problem with that parser function has been that it causes the page it searches for to be listed on Special:WantedPages even if it exists.

Also, your proposed change is not the same as what I have. does not behave identically to. The difference in behavior occurs when whitespace is passed as the value for. The first case (your alternative), evaluates to the white space that was passed to the parameter. The second case (what I am using), evaluates to the default value. This makes a difference in some cases. In the specific case we are considering, using the alternative would cause the border color to be unspecified; or worse, invalid. In the case of unspecified, it will instead use CSS's  property. In the case of invalid, as exemplified in my response to Timeshifter, browsers may choose to completely ignore the impacted property; thus causing a complete absence of the border.