Last modified: 2014-11-04 22:52:42 UTC
Exactly as it says on the tin for which I can't find a current bug. So that there is no need to code either conditional templates or entirely separate templates along with all the associated drudge work to go from one caseing to another *and* to avoid the many inconsistencies we have at present. {{template|Par1=val1|Par2=val2...}} should be exactly the same as far as the editor is concerned as {{template|par1=val1|par2=val2...}}} At present, if the templates is coded as either of these, it will fail if the editor uses the other caseing.
This makes sense, since I've run into several improperly used template, but doing so will likely break other templates where users may have (inappropriately) taken advantage of case sensitivity: {{template|par1=val1|PAR1=val2...}} I think parameter case sensitivity should be treated as a "template standard" and so template "programmers" (i.e. users) should be informed of this issue (i.e. the information widely disseminated through as many channels as possible).
This might or might not have been a good idea to start with, but by now there's way too much legacy content. Also, case-sensitivity of template parameters matches case-sensitivity of the template names themselves. Given the relatively marginal benefit of allowing case-insensitive parameters to begin with (is it really hard to always use lowercase?), I would suggest WONTFIX.
I was considering doing this, but with a config variable to enable it (disabled by default), but if people think that's excessive, I'm not especially attached to the idea.
I don't think a config option would be useful here. It would potentially break copying content between wikis, e.g., Wikipedia.
(In reply to comment #4) > I don't think a config option would be useful here. It would potentially break > copying content between wikis, e.g., Wikipedia. > I agree completely. This should either be fixed or not fixed, introducing a variable here would just create incompatibilities between wikis and make Import/Export unreliable. (In reply to comment #2) > This might or might not have been a good idea to start with, but by now there's > way too much legacy content. Also, case-sensitivity of template parameters > matches case-sensitivity of the template names themselves. Given the > relatively marginal benefit of allowing case-insensitive parameters to begin > with (is it really hard to always use lowercase?), I would suggest WONTFIX. > I'm inclined to agree here. This seems like it would've been a great idea when it was being designed, but it's too late now.
