Talk:Classes

Adding Icons to the Classes page

Should this be done? It would probably make the page look better, overall. And how would a color-scheme change affect the page? Please reply below. --<(Blocco)> 00:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

It would be a nice addition, but the layout of the entire page would need to be changed.
--<(Camoy)> 5, April 2010

Speaking of which... ---Mr Doom Bringer 19:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I'm yanking this design. Never liked it and it was meant to be temporary. Standby, rewriting page. ---Mr Doom Bringer 20:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Gordonrox24 has uploaded many images that we can use for icons. --<(Blocco)> 22:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I think Doom said that was all of them.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Checking Each Class?

Some of the classes (besides HtmlWindow/Service) are not instancable. A good example is AutoJoint. Should we remove those? --<(Blocco)> 23:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

It is good to have documentation even if they are not instance-able. I think there should be a note that says that they aren't though. --User:Camoy, 7 April 2010

AutoJoint is instanceable, I've used it in scripts. It doesn't do much other than acts as a weld. Additionally yes, completeness trumps usefulness. There's a page for the Geometry object, which was never implemented and there's a page for the Controller property, which hasn't been used for 2 years now. ---Mr Doom Bringer 05:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Is AutoJoint a service? I can't get it from Instance.new. --<(Blocco)> 16:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

That's interesting, I can't get it to work now either. ---Mr Doom Bringer 19:08, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Hidden Objects

We need a way to denote objects/services which are not in object browser at all (at least by default). --GoldenUrg 01:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Make a note on the object page? ---Mr Doom Bringer 19:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)