Template talk:IPA chart vowels

src: 3.bp.blogspot.com

Nice work. --Michael Z. 2005-08-5 20:39 Z

Video Template talk:IPA chart vowels

All the brackets

Do we really need all the bracketed vowels (like the mid versions of e & ø; central of a)? It's getting a wee bit cluttered. Sure, some languages use /a/ to refer to a central vowel, but that's because most languages don't actually use the cardinal vowels for their phonemes. I think it's okay to just to cut it back a bit... --Felix the Cassowary (?e h?: j?) 06:00, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

• Ask Kwami about it. (S)he added the bracketed mid vowels to it.  Denelson83  06:26, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Whatever people think is best. True, it looks cluttered. On the other hand, people are misled to think that [e] is a close mid vowel and [a] is a front vowel, because that's what the chart says, when it's probably more common for them to be mid and central, respectively. So we either compromise appearance or comprehension. I don't have a strong opinion either way. kwami 06:59, 2005 September 10 (UTC)

I think we should stick the the chart as published by IPA, as that is the title. Anyway, duplicating symbols is confusing. In some relevant articles we could add a few words that the position actually indicates whole area around it. Every language dialect has its own precise positions. -Woodstone 12:27:29, 2005-09-10 (UTC)

Maps Template talk:IPA chart vowels

Other vowels?

Hi Denelson,

On the consonant table you created asterisked links to the consonants not supported by the IPA. Would you want to do something similar for the vowels? There's a Near-close near-back unrounded vowel as well as three close compressed vowels (links at the close rounded vowel articles).

Just a thought.

kwami 07:38, 2005 September 12 (UTC)

If you want the correct semantic, they're bullets, not asterisks.  Denelson83  06:29, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

And another, Near-close central unrounded vowel, for English schwi. kwami 15:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

Wrapping in Safari

Some of the pairs are wrapping for me in Safari. I am viewing at the default text size, but different font specified in my User monobook.css. Here's a rendering: [1]. I could try to fix this myself, but I'd rather leave it to someone who's familiar with this template. --Michael Z. 2005-10-18 18:05 Z

Even with no-break spaces? Strange. You might want to use the double-sized IPA vowel chart instead.  Denelson83  18:41, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Yup. I tried adding white-space:nowrap, but that didn't help either. I logged out; looks okay in the default font. My own style sheet uses the ubiquitous Mac font Lucida Grande, which is a good choice for international text (better than Arial Unicode, but lacking italics.). The wrapping is something I just noticed, I'm sure the template looked okay a week or two ago.

It's probably best to bullet-proof the display, to account for unknown fonts in other user agents. I see that position is specified by percentages, element width in ems, and font-size is relative ("smaller"). Because it all relates to the background image, wouldn't it be best to specify everything in pixels? I realize pixel-specced fonts are not as accessible, but since we're essentially creating an image here, it would seem appropriate anyway.

But in the mean time, I'll just make the text elements slightly wider. --Michael Z. 2005-10-18 19:32 Z

Done, and it looks okay in my browser with LG or with the default font. If the vowels have moved too far right in your browser, it can probably be fixed by giving each div a text-align:left; declaration. --Michael Z. 2005-10-18 19:42 Z

Okay. It still looks good. Perhaps it had something to do with your window size or screen resolution?  Denelson83  19:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Resizing the window has no effect. Funny: hitting the browser's "increase font size" button just makes everything bigger; still readable, since the divs' width is specified in ems. But making the text smaller makes some of them start to wrap--probably a rounding error. Too bad we can't specify the image size in ems too. --Michael Z. 2005-10-18 22:19 Z

Yeah, that would require too much processing power, and Wikipedia's speed is still quite volatile.  Denelson83  23:52, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

src: 4.bp.blogspot.com

Nice

Just found this.. its an excellent feature here on the wikipedia. If there were featured templates like there are featured articles and pictures, this would be one. Good work to those involved. drumguy⁸⁸⁰⁰ - speak? 03:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

Slanting

Why does it slant? The open-front-unrounded vowel is below where it says near-front. Why is that? ~ Ghelæ ^talk_contribs 16:57, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The trapezoidal shape of the vowel chart is meant to approximate where the dorsum of the tongue is when the vowel is pronounced. -- Denelson83 20:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Aah, I see. I think. ~ Ghelæ ^talk_contribs 07:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

src: www.oxfordsinginglessons.co.uk

Chart broken when image broken?

Hmm, it looks like when there is a problem loading the image, then the vowels on the chart are positioned starting about halfway down the chart, with the bottom half of vowels displayed on top of whatever is below the chart.

I don't quite grok the interaction of CSS and WikiMarkup here, so I'm not going to try to fix it myself, but you can see what it looks like by setting your browser to not load images, or by firewalling upload.wikimedia.org. Cheers, Vectro 04:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed this issue. Vectro 17:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

IPA formatting

I restored IPA formatting ( {{IPA}} ) to the chart so that it displays properly. However, I did not do this in Commons, as I don't know how widespread support is for that template. kwami (talk) 06:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

src: previews.123rf.com

/?/ & /oe/

In both of my browsers (Firefox and Safari), the open front rounded and open-mid front rounded show up with the same symbol, /oe/. This is only in the rendered text (not in the edit window), but I have no problems with any of the other IPA symbols here (such as the common confusion of /?/ with /a/). Is this a known bug, or is it just me, or is there a problem with the symbol we've used? -- 'z?z?v? (talk) 06:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Are you using a buggy font? -- Denelson83 14:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

My default font is Helvetica, and when I changed it, no other font showed this problem. I wouldn't have expected Helvetica to be buggy. Odd. -- 'z?z?v? (talk) 18:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you please tell me how you did this in Safari? I'm so mad at Helvetica for this issue :P But I can't go back to Firefox... it's got so many problems displaying so many languages. Thank you Kraslev (talk) 07:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't believe I ever figured out a solution. I'm currently trying to force my Wikipedia account to use Lucida Grande, but I can't seem to find a way. I suppose it's not a big deal, since the one flaw with Helvetica is in correctly displaying a vowel that no language uses, but it's the principle of the thing! Good luck! -- 'z?z?v? (talk) 19:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

It's definitely the principle! It's driving me nuts! Not only that, but I can't stand the square-shaped R that Helvetica uses. It's so ugly :( But yeah, if anyone figures this out, please share. I'm frustrated. Kraslev (talk) 17:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

converged with Commons

This template and the one on Wikimedia Commons had diverged quite a bit, and both still had some of the DIVs too small to contain the symbols in my preferred font of Lucida Sans Unicode. I've updated them both now and added comments to indicate the site-unique bits. Not R (talk) 23:21, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

In Articles

If it creates extra space (that is, when put beside text, a line of white space appears), then report to bugzilla.96.53.149.117 (talk) 04:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

Double template

The same graph is in {{vowels}}. btw, is the commons-copyedit still to be maintained? (that is #3), exclusing the picture. -DePiep (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Not done and not likely to be done (See #Closing: Not merged, solved different) -DePiep (talk) 22:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC) Propose Template:Vowels(edit talk links history) into Template:CSS IPA vowel chart(edit talk links history).

• Reason: Duplication. Both templates have the same subject, the IPA vowel chart.
• Direction of merge: the target title is more descriptive, so we want to use that one. Number of usages (transclusions), that would use a Redirect, not looked at. -DePiep (talk) 09:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Related topics, but not essential to this proposal:

- Parallel situation, Proposed merging too: Template:Consonants(edit talk links history) and Template:CSS IPA consonant chart(edit talk links history).

- CSS could be dropped from the title, since we should not be concerned with technique here.

- Not to be confused with the picture of the same chart file:IPA_vowel_chart_2005.png, which remains untouched as it a source, and it is useful for not-correct rendering browsers (IPA-characters).

- Check congruency with template at Commons necessary. -DePiep (talk) 09:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC) -Consonants proposal too -DePiep (talk) 10:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

As noted at Consonants, one of these templates is a shell that transcludes the other. There is no duplication. -- kwami (talk) 10:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

These two vowel-templates do not transclude another. They are unconnected. Also, topic is the same at both: IPA vowel chart. -DePiep (talk) 11:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

The vowel template is unconnected from this template because it is different. The purpose of the vowel template is to provide navigation for articles some of which are for sounds that are not on the IPA vowel chart. It seems unlikely that you are proposing to add non-standard symbols to this template; assuming that you are not proposing that, there is a need for a separate navigation template. --Pi zero (talk) 23:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

The non-standard vowels can be marked somehow. As is done in the IPA 2005 chart by greying them: IPA (2005). -DePiep (talk) 21:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC) -Linkfix to image -DePiep (talk) 21:29, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't have thought it desirable to have the non-standard symbols on the IPA version at all; but here's yet another possibility. Although it makes sense to me to have more than one template, as such, because they seem to me to have logically different functions, that can be so without duplicating the markup. We could have a single copy of the markup with an optional parameter to generate the variant for the other template. The other template could simply call the one with the markup, using the optional parameter. --Pi zero (talk) 09:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with common known, marked non-IPA symbols. The IPA charts have a lot of footnotes already.

Indeed, would be a great solution: somehow overlay/extra parameter/additional text or symbols optional in a basic template. (And could also be useful to superpose other links: to soundfiles, to Unicode-numbers etc.). But I myself see and experiance this problem: the template is already a very elaborate construction. Fontsizes, table width, column widths, border changes, horizontal & vertical positions; used width units: em, %, fontsize together. Using IPA-template to get the symbol right, all are wikilinks. And this is only the basic template, already a tricky thing to maintain or edit. In general it is bad for maintenance if multiple specialists are needed together to get an edit right. We would create a concrete set of templates. -DePiep (talk) 10:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Under construction: {{Show text}}. Would give the option to select in each article separately whether yes/no show non-IPA-symbols in the template. Some issues there still, but you can take a look. -DePiep (talk) 00:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Using the already existing template {{yesno}} does the job. See {{Vowels}} & its documentation. -DePiep (talk) 13:46, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Merging IPA/non-IPA symbols: Roundup & solution

Template:Vowels(edit talk links history) and Template:CSS IPA vowel chart(edit talk links history).

Objection

Above, Pi zero argues (in my words now) that the two vowel-templates differ (also) at this point: including or excluding non-IPA-symbols. It is not desirable to have these mixed (i.e. non-IPA-symbols on an IPA-template or in an specific IPA-article).

Solution

The template {{Vowels}} now has a switch, which enables per article to show/hide the non-IPA symbols (and the corresponding footnote). Usage: {{Vowels|shownonIPA=yes}}, or {{Vowels|shownonIPA=no}}. The default is 'yes', i.e. {{Vowels}} has default setting: 'shownonIPA=yes', which corresponds with current usage of the template (effect unchanged).

Also

Some improvements go along: standard v-d-e box, and "Show chart image" is included.

Todo

Articles that use {{CSS IPA vowel chart}} can be changed into using {{Vowels|shownonIPA=no}}. option float=left needed. Then make that template into REDIRECT (saves its history, btw).

-DePiep (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC) Addition on float -DePiep (talk) 16:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Merging {{Vowels}} and {{CSS IPA vowel chart}}: Roundup & solution

Template:Vowels(edit talk links history) and Template:CSS IPA vowel chart(edit talk links history).

Conclusion

I understand the point by Pi Zero above: one is a navigation, the other is the basic chart (table).

Solution

I have separated these two functions. Now {{IPA vowel chart}} is the basic chart (table, trapezium). Is can be used on its own (as is done in IPA#vowels). And {{Vowels}} is the navigation box: standard navigation style. And it transcludes the basic trapezium {{IPA vowel chart}}.

Minor remarks

The navbox {{Vowels}} has some non-standard styles (non-standard for Navboxes). First: It floats to the right, which was the location of the handcoded version. So the using article pages are not disturbed. Second: it has a fixed width (navboxes normally talke full 100% width). This too is so not to disturb existing page-layout. Third: I rmoved the page (rennamed) tfrom "CSS IPA vowel chart" to "IPA vowel chart". The reason is that the used technique is not relevant to the using editor.

On non-IPA and IPA symbols

As noted in the section above (and the template/doc), both templates take a variable option "shownonIPA=yes" or "shownonIPA=no", as to show or hide non-IPA's. Default =yes.

Closing

If this looks OK for fellow editors & wikiusers, I will consider the Merge-proposal finished. -DePiep (talk) 16:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Closing: Not merged, solved different

Discussion lead to a different outcome:

1. The bare table need his own template, for in-line usage in articles.
2. The navbox Vowels can transclude the trapezium-table, and do a full navigation-task.
3. Including non-IPA letters is by option (variable "shownonIPA=no", see documentation) BUT does not occur in Vowels.
4. Both templates have their own function now, and they are connected (which is different from before).
5. Dropped "CSS" from the name (by Move)
6. Other changes pertain to layout, and are out of scope now.

This has already been implied. See also: {{Consonants}}, with the same construction. -DePiep (talk) 22:26, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

layout: bad visibility near-close near-front rounded vowel

(separated from the main thread DePiep ~00:35h).

Not sure if this is related, but the symbol for the near-close near-front rounded vowel is partially invisible, possibly due to its proximity to the near close central vowels. Is there a way to fix this? -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 00:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Could you tell us which browser (IE, FF, SAF, etc)? Any extreme zooming? thank you -DePiep (talk) 00:37, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

The computer I'm on right now uses IE and it seems as though no amount of zoom adjustments fixes the problem. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 03:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Indeed probably overlap by the neighboring close central vowels. I changed: the box for the close central vowels is smaller (from 4.7em to 4.0em), and this box is moved to the right (from 41.5% to 44.5% from left side). Is this enough?

I want to note a visual effect here, which I do not understand yet. The bare chart {{tl:IPA vowel chart}} has the bullets nicely on the trapeziumline. But when it is transcluded in {{Vowels}}, they shift to the left, off their line. Strange, and don't know how to solve. -DePiep (talk) 21:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Propose removing footnote on Long

Let's remove the footnote A long vowel is indicated by appending :

• It's not in the original IPA vowel chart
• There are more suprasegmentals (and diacritics for that matter) we could mention here. It's an arbitrary selection now.
  

-DePiep (talk) 04:52, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 Done -DePiep (talk) 03:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Using the bullet in the footnote on rounded-unrounded

See IPA talk here. Problem was: the bullet in footnote showed different from the graphic itself in some browsers. Solution(1): The bullet was removed from the footnote altogether here by rewording. Solution(2): Later on it occurred, the problem might be solved by using, in the footnote, {{IPA}} as is done in the graph: {{IPA|{{·}}}}. Conclusion: since (2) is less ad hoc and does allow us to use a bullet, it should be used when adding a bullet to the template. -DePiep (talk) 08:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Mid vowels

I've recently turned mid front unrounded vowel into an article (splitting content formerly at close-mid front unrounded vowel. Because the split proposal has so far been uncontested for over a year, I anticipate the creation of mid front rounded vowel, mid back rounded vowel, and mid back unrounded vowel. Could someone adjust the vowel chart accordingly as we did with e.g. near-close near-front rounded vowel? I lack the technical sophistication to do it myself. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 19:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Added mid front unrounded vowel, please check. -DePiep (talk) 19:53, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Do I understand the three anticipated creations you mention need a symbol in there too? -DePiep (talk) 19:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you've got it exactly. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 21:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

But mid front rounded vowel lists ø and oe. Mid back rounded vowel lists o and ?. Mid back unrounded vowel lists ? and ?. These three pairs are in our vowel graph already, not? Please note that I am not an IPA-scolar. I do tables :-) -DePiep (talk) 23:20, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Currently, those links redirect to disambiguation pages (as did mid front unrounded vowel earlier today. If you want to wait until they really are separate articles, that's fine.

It also looks like there's an article open central unrounded vowel that should go on the table. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 01:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

So, e.g. about Mid back rounded vowel o and ?. These two symbols are there already. Will there be a third, new symbol in between? I get that, we can put a symbol there (or a pair). Without article, we put them there without link. Linking to a dab-page would not be good (unless there is some line about that symbol/sound, I'd say Wiki-wise). Concluding: if you provide new symbols & their name/place, I can place them. Links can be added later, when there is an article. That a" is done. -01:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

By the way, any soundfiles available? Or graphic files of the symbol? For the other IPA box. -DePiep (talk) 02:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ So missing vowels are, with current links: [ø?], [o?] or [??]. Symbols should have a link to an article, through the list in {{IPAsym}}. Don't let the error intimidate you! Just write here which article link you expect for a symbol. -DePiep (talk) 13:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

ø? should link to Mid front rounded vowel, o? to Mid back rounded vowel, and ?? to Mid back unrounded vowel. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 13:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Added to {{IPAsym}} list --> Errors gone. Will place them in the chart. -DePiep (talk) 14:32, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Added 3 mid-vowels to chart. Please check. -DePiep (talk) 14:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

This is a good addition. The only problem I see is that the mid vowels are cut off at the bottom so that the lowering diacritic shows up as a line, which would be a retracted diacritic (at least in Lucida sans unicode). Is it possible to fix that? -- ?oyo?? 05:54, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, they aren't cut off at higher zoom levels (in FF). I still don't know how to fix it. -- ?oyo?? 06:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Clutter

Recently some additions were made to this template, that consist of symbols that only differ from existing ones by diacritics. In my opinion that creates unnecessary clutter. Remember that this template is used in many linguistic articles to give a quick view of the structure of the IPA vowel system. Adding a lot of extra symbols and diacritics has a deterring effect on less specialistic readers. We should consider to remove them again. Diacritics have standard sound altering meaning and are not needed in an overview. -Woodstone (talk) 08:04, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I have added them following this talk above. But you have a point here. I have no opinion on this (on deletion or inclusion of these symbols), I'll leave it to IPA-users. -DePiep (talk) 10:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

They were added to the template because there were new articles created (see the discussion here). If we take them out of the template as they are, how do you suggest we provide navigation to Mid front unrounded vowel, Mid front rounded vowel, Mid back unrounded vowel, Mid back rounded vowel, near-close central unrounded vowel, and near-close central rounded vowel? -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 16:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Adding the mid vowels does support a more comprehensive representation of the world's common vowels, but it also does look cluttered. I think the chart currently is about as detailed as it needs to be; I don't think we should specify rounding for mid central or add low central rounded. Whatever happens to it, I think consistency should be a priority, i.e. if we get rid of mid vowels we should also remove other symbols with diacritics, including low central and near-close centrals. That way it will at least be consistent with the official IPA chart even if it doesn't show as many distinctions. -- ?oyo?? 20:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Maybe I'm arguing semantics here, but I don't agree with the notion that the chart is cluttered. There's nothing disorderly about the presentation and its layout is just as intuitive as it was before. The only difference is that there are more things, but that's not the same as cluttered. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[a?m 'f?????????i]} 20:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I actually think it looks fine. I suppose what I meant was it might be a bit more confusing to those who aren't familiar with IPA. Personally I think we should keep them. The only issue I see is that the diacritics don't show up right. -- ?oyo?? 03:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Technical possiblilities

Technically, we could enlarge the template to show more of the background grid line. This would have a layout effect in the articles where it is used (filling up the introduction section, pushing away the regular text). Another possibility: differentiate between usage of the template in the {{IPA navigation}} and in article text. A switch parameter could be set to: "only show this symbol in navbox" (for completeness). -DePiep (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

If it were differentiated, maybe we could have one version that only showed dedicated IPA symbols and one like it is now; or, maybe the extra symbols could be shown as faded like in the official chart. But why would we want to enlarge it and show more of the grid line? -- ?oyo?? 03:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I read "cluttered', which might mean "crowded". Then, if more gridline is visible between the letters, the pattern is visible more strongly, which enhances the structure. Hence more overview for the eye. -DePiep (talk) 03:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think aesthetics are as much an issue as the possibility of confusion over duplicated symbols and too much detail. But would enlarging the chart allow the diacritics to show properly? Maybe try this in sandbox? -- ?oyo?? 08:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Enlarging is not that much aesthetics, it is improving visuality. The eye likes and understands structure & patterns. That way the crowdedness would be reduced without dropping anything.

Now it is just a technical option, here in this in a subsection, I don't want to distract you from the main discussion above. What symbols to include or not is not my gamefield.

What do you mean with (not) "show properly"? Example? With me, details (diacritics etc.) are very small, I cannot tell which one it is -- but I have found no wrongs. How does the symbol show in the new infobox (in the articles), with the big font? -DePiep (talk) 10:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

On the mid vowels on the chart (e ø ? o), the lowering diacritic is cut off at the bottom so instead of e? it shows up with just a line underneath. They have different meanings so it's important that they appear correctly. -- ?oyo?? 23:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

You're right, so we should make the box for the latter bigger (can be done) i.e. the letterbox that hides the gridline would become higher. But that would make the background grid lines almost disappear. I'll look for another solution. -DePiep (talk) 22:24, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I have changed the space that a symbol gets in the IPA vowel chart. Please check if the problem is solved, and drop a note here. (Actually, I have also changed the horizontal spacing: now first the bullet is positioned on the right spot, and the vowels shove in from left & right. This way a line of bullets is more straight). -DePiep (talk) 23:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Not solved... the vowels only appear shifted slightly to the left. They are straighter, but the 2nd & 3rd columns should be a little to the right so the bullets align with the lines. -- ?oyo?? 02:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, as for the diacritics below, I'll have an other look (can you give browser & skin type that err?).

And about the lining of the bullets: I have checked them in multiple "skins" in two browsers (FF & Safari). All in the IPA_vowel_chart/testcases page (skins can be altered by clicking Chick, Classic ... Vector). It shows that the position of the bullet is not always on the same point (we want that to be the exact line crossing, clearly). So that ideal cannot be attained this way. What we do have now is that the bullet itself is positioned, and so at least the (vertical) rows of bullets are in line (no wave any more). Earlier, the bullet was pushed to the right by the width of the left-hand letter, smaller or wider, and so that position varied with the font & letter. That irregularity is now gone. -DePiep (talk) 02:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ I've been using Firefox and Modern. I see that it displays better in most of the simpler skins with bigger fonts, so that is probably good enough. You've done a good job with this chart, thanks for your work. -- ?oyo?? 00:20, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanx. Now I have discovered that this explains it: the mid-open row of symbols (below the problem-row) covers the lower part of the mid-central symbols. Today, that is demonstrated in the sandbox: {{IPA vowel chart/sandbox}}}. I've reduced the vertical space taken per symbol in the template (by reducing bottom padding into 0px). Please keep specifying your issues here. -DePiep (talk)

I'm still around, I just wanted to say thanks. The diacritics are still cut off though; the mid open vowels seem too far below the mid vowels to be covering anything up. Is there no way to expand the bottom boundary of the boxes for the vowel pairs so that all of the symbol shows? -- ?oyo?? 04:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I did not find how to do it. Btw, the font itself is not covering, but the opaque (non-transparent) background of the box the symbol is in. I've colored that orange in the sandbox; in the live version they are yellowish. It is this background that hides the grid line behind a symbol. So, if the bottom is covered by the box below (the opaque background of that symbol's box, that is), extending the bottom does not help. I can only reproduce the problem by zooming in, so creating very big fonts. Do you see the trapeziod grid (verticalish lines) below the problem symbols (if yes, then the problem lies elsewhere)? I changed the Template:IPA vowel chart/sandbox into smaller symbols as a test (120% -> 100%). Same with live version: now font-size=100%. Problem still there? -DePiep (talk) 11:15, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

No, the problem is gone with the smaller fonts but the symbols are way off alignment, so I assume the anchor point for the location of each vowel box is at the top left corner? The grid has always been visible, and each vowel box has plenty of space from the others, there's no overlap. -- ?oyo?? 23:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, if the problem is gone I promise the font-size will stay 100% (not 120% as is was before)! Afterwards, we can now solve the alignment (bizzy doing so). Essence is, that horizontal alignment was still font-related (because: the vowelpair box is 3em wide, which is a font-thing). I am changing that into a fixed width (the whole trapezoid box will be hard coded px-defined). I will play some more days, and then come back here. You can follow this in the Template:IPA_vowel_chart/sandbox. Your comments are very helpful. -DePiep (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

At last: bullet fixed on the exact position

At last, I have reached this: the bullet-position is independent of the font/symbolwidth/skin (tested up to font-size:200%). Everything is done by px. The whole trapeziod area is positioned hardcoded. This does not solve the overlapping problem we are here talking. Can you tell: do you prefer 120% or 100% font-size? -DePiep (talk) 23:54, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh shit, it's beautiful! Great work. I think 120% is more attractive and readable, but I have finally realized the source of the problem, which is the font itself. 120% shows up as 15.6px with my settings, and my font (Lucida sans unicode) seems to specifically render the diacritics as cut off at around 16px (and only there). I have no insight on how to change that, if it's even possible. Maybe I should change fonts. -- ?oyo?? 10:31, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The font-thing, good you found out, is not my specialty. Maybe you can drop a question at Village pump/tech. There are very good people there, once I get my question right ;-) . The size we leave at 120% then, as it was until last week. Enjoy! -DePiep (talk) 12:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Tiny font-size

The vowels of the chart now appear very small and diacritics don't appear properly. I couldn't deal with the template because it's not easy to edit. So, would someone please make the vowel font-sizes bigger as they used to be? I think they were 120% or 125%. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The previous well-sandboxed version was thrown away, while the old (and now reinstalled) version does not cooperate well in the complicated template situation. I've asked the deleting admin/editor [2]. -DePiep (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:RM Template:IPA vowel chart -> Template:IPA chart vowels

Per naming scheme, see Category:IPA chart templates, Template:IPA vowel chart should be at Template:IPA chart vowels. Indiana State (talk) 03:05, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

It's not much of a "scheme" but I can see the logic. It doesn't matter either way since the user experience is identical. Your change may have been reverted because you accidentally renamed it to "IPA charts vowels." -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[ã:? 'f????????nl?]} 03:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

(Indeed reverted for that reason.) But the point is correct. The "scheme" is shown at {{IPA charts and audio}}. This is a newer naming scheme (10 months old), and exactly the new scheme vowel name was moved to look like the old name they were more used to [3]. The more great an editor, the less easy to accept a change. -DePiep (talk) 01:32, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

@DePiep - haha :-) @Aeusoes - I would say it is a scheme, even if it is not labelled as such. The user experience is actually not the same if users browse the templates, that's how I found the inconsistency. Regarding the reversion of my moves - I myself asked for deletion. After I made the wrong move, I made another wrong move and at the end the possibility of simply undoing the move of the "great editor" had gone. What can be done to overcome the name introduced by the "great editor"? Indiana State (talk) 11:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Propose the name change here, and when it is agreed upon an admin is needed to swap the twpo names (since the new name already is occupied as a redirect). See {{Requested move}}. I didn't make a big issue of it back then, but I'd still support the change. -DePiep (talk) 12:42, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm fine with the change, too. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[ã:? 'f????????nl?]} 17:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ move done today (not by me, see below). I changed some double redirects, it was getting circular with all the earlier stuff. Looks fine now. -DePiep (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

Title and footnote

I don't believe the initial remedy to have been adequate, 'cause we shouldn't be calling it the "IPA vowel chart" if it's not that. Also, I see no pressing need in cluttering the template with a footnote about how it differs exactly and why. I think the most elegant solution would be to reword the title slightly, e.g. to say "IPA-symbol" or "IPA-derived"; it'll get the point across to those to whom it matters. 213.7.22.7 (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Bullet after æ

Why is there a bullet after æ when there's no rounded counterpart? There isn't a bullet after ? or before ?. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by Zgialor (talk o contribs) 17:58, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

The meaning this conveys to me, regardless of intent, is that æ covers only the rounded form, whereas ? and ? cover both rounded and unrounded forms. If that meaning isn't intended, I'd say the table should be changed accordingly. --Pi zero (talk) 22:41, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

• ? does not specify roundness. Note that the bullets on the official chart denote cardinality, so they should really only be found at intersections. ? should be moved to the right, and the ?-? pair should be moved to the left. 62.228.118.129 (talk) 23:01, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

added images

To remind people that the trapezoid we use isn't the only way to represent vowel space, I added the original articulatory quadrilateral and the formant triangle. -- kwami (talk) 19:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Reverted as too much "clutter", but what do people think? Should we reflect only one conception, or remind people there are other ways of looking at it? People have spend a lot of time here worrying about what a low central vowel is, perhaps unnecessarily. -- kwami (talk) 19:33, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't think we should put them. This is a navigational template. Those images would be better placed in article space (for the reasons you identify) if they aren't already. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[l?ts b?i: p??'la??t]} 20:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Display problems

In my browser (Google Chrome 52.0.2743.116 m), each unrounded-rounded pair of IPA symbols in the table displays a little too far to the right, making the left symbol cover up half of the rounded dot. Does it display the same way for other people as well? This should be fixed; it looks bad. -- Eru·tuon 20:49, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Same here (Firefox 48.0.2 on Windows 10). I have no idea what the fix is, if you find it that bad looking, try a different browser and/or a different OS (Debian for example). Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like it's not just me then. I'm taking a look at each template that makes up this atrociously nested template to see where the problem is. -- Eru·tuon 22:52, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh my gosh, it's just a huge mess. About a million tables nested inside each other. I guess the IPA letters get pushed to the right because they are in the most nested table of all, and each table pushes the table inside it a little more to the right. Ideally the whole thing should be remade entirely, but it's so complicated... -- Eru·tuon 23:00, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

@Erutuon: I actually just rewrote literally *everything*, and the code is so much better now. /'sw???yn/78 06:30, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I moved the bullet to the right in {{IPA chart/table vowels/vowelpair}}, which is used in {{IPA chart/table vowels}}, which is used in this template. Now {{IPA chart/table vowels}} and {{IPA navigation}} look terrible, while this template looks okay. Frustrating. -- Eru·tuon 00:18, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

{{IPA chart/table vowels}} looks correct now, at least in my browser, but {{IPA navigation}} looks terrible indeed. I think you should take it to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) or whatever the appropriate page is. Mr KEBAB (talk) 04:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Mr KEBAB: I simplified the code in {{IPA chart/table vowels/vowelpair}}. Now it is impossible for the bullet to be out of line with the IPA characters. (They are now just all one block of text, instead of three free-floating characters: ?ou.) I just have to figure out the details of positioning... -- Eru·tuon 05:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

There's still a massive difference between {{IPA chart/table vowels}} (and {{IPA navigation}}) and {{IPA chart vowels}}. The vowels are positioned very differently in each. Trying to figure out the problem. I'll post in at the Village Pump if I can't figure anything out. -- Eru·tuon 05:11, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I figured out the cause of the difference: the trapezium changed position depending on whether a wrapping infobox table was present or not. Added position:relative; to the table in {{IPA chart/table vowels}}. Now to fix the position of the vowel pairs. -- Eru·tuon 05:25, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

The vowels are repositioned. However, the bullets don't line up with the trapezium in the navbox and infobox. I tried a lot of things and it appears to be because of font size. It can't be fixed by using percentage font sizes, since those are relative to the font size of the containing element (infobox and navbox), and using em sizes is prohibited. So it will have to be lived with. -- Eru·tuon 07:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Nardog: When I cleaned up the vowel template, it was off-center for me, too (Firefox, Noto Sans, Linux Mint). Centering it seems to have decentered it for others. It would be nice to find a way to get this to center for everyone. Your recent edits decentered it for me again, and it looks like you repositioned every pairing by the amount that I repositioned the entire table. It would be better to simply remove ";top:-3.5px;left:4.5px" rather than manually move each symbol with the positioning template. I'll go ahead and do that, and set it back to the original positions in the meantime.
The reason this is even an issue to begin with, is that different fonts are different sizes, but the chart is a picture. I wonder if specifying the chart's dimensions in ie em would help resolve this. I'll give this a go, too.
/'sw???yn/78 03:08, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I performed some sorcery (It took quite a while to get right!), and dramatically improved cross-font compatibility (for horizontal placement).

Previously, the template placed the top-left of the first vowel in each pair at the provided coordinates. The problem, though, is that in a non-monospace font, different symbols have different widths (?i?, for example, is *way* thinner than ie ???.). This means that different x coordinates had to be used for each vowel pairing, even if two vowel pairings *should* be at the same horizontal location! These differential x coordinates had been and could only be calculated per one particular font.

Now, the template places the top-left of the bullet-point at the provided coordinates, and then places the provided vowels to the left and right of that bullet-point. This means that all vowel pairs at the same horizontal location on this quadrilateral can use the same x coordinate, and it means that the coordinates are *way* less font-specific.

/'sw???yn/78 06:21, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Why the name is "IPA chart vowels"?

I have this question, because it is rather "extended" but not standard, like in The_International_Phonetic_Alphabet_(revised_to_2015).pdf--Divega (talk) 19:56, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah the same thing bothers me. Tashi _{Talk to me} 15:53, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

The grammar was fixed when I rewrote everything (Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet) (The original author (DePiep) doesn't appear to be a native English speaker). Regarding whether it is accurate to call this chart an "IPA" chart: yes, it is accurate -- it is composed entirely of IPA symbols. /'sw???yn/78 03:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

/'sw???yn/ it is not a question, if there only valid symbols were used, but why it is called IPA chart vowels, although IPA has in this file no mention of all symbols.--Divega (talk) 11:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Which symbols aren't IPA symbols? -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[l?ts b?i: p??'la??t]} 16:13, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

One more time. It is called "IPA chart vowels"- Do you see some differences between number of symbols in Figure from IPA and what is called "IPA chart vowels"? Just a simple math: Template has 39 symbols, figure from PDF - 28. It is some extended table, or even WP:OR, since officially 11 symbols are not there.--Divega (talk) 07:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, it's different from the official table. But you seem to be implying that the additions to it are not IPA. They are, indeed IPA. -- Ƶ§oe?¹ _{[l?ts b?i: p??'la??t]} 17:18, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

@Divega: If you look at the Handbook of IPA, you would see the use of some combinations of diacritics and alphabets, but those combinations are not directly attested in the chart itself, their components are. Yet those combinations are IPA. One example is the Galician Alveolar Fricative (/s?/) on page 82.--- Tanay 15:52, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

To Ƶ§oe?¹: I understand it and not implying "that the additions to it are not IPA". It is called "IPA chart vowels", but in case of clicking at any of extended symbols I see following text: "There is no dedicated symbol in the International Phonetic Alphabet that represents the exact mid front unrounded vowel between close-mid [e] and open-mid [?], but it is normally written ?e?". So is it is in IPA but not correct represented, because it is just "normally written" (original research in this case, since IPA has no standard for it). Are there not normal representations?

To Tanay if "those combinations are not directly attested in the chart itself" than is it proper name "IPA chart vowels"? There is chart without this vocals, so this one has to be some kind of extended chart (is do not consider possibility of using false symbols).--Divega (talk) 07:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Divega: I am not an expert on IPA, but if I am not mistaken, this is a Chart which contains IPA vowels, and those vowels can be formed from any combination of diacritics and alphabets that are present in the IPA. This is "an IPA chart", not "the IPA Chart". I hope I have been able to explain to you (English is not my first/native language). --- Tanay 11:25, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

First of all -- in the name there is no "an" or "the". Also, when I'm searching in Wiki for "__ IPA Chart", I'm looking for "the IPA Chart", not for some collection or original work. By the way, if I click on some not original symbols (I have mentioned that before) there is a text "There is no dedicated symbol in the International Phonetic Alphabet", so it is kind of misleading title at all (if there is no dedicated symbol, what was used in chart with the name IPA?). --Divega (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia