[02:17:36] Hi @u99of9 - Z6894 is indeed meant to be the equality function for all lightweight enum types. It's unfortunate that you can't see it when you visit the page for a particular type, but it should work for comparing any 2 instances of these types. If you are finding that it doesn't behave properly in any way, please let me know. (Sorry for the delayed response.) (re@u99of [02:17:36] 9: Fo [02:17:36] r example, I would like to add Z28272 as the equality function for Z27951. But an alternative would be to set Z6894 as the equ...) [02:44:43] Thanks David, (re @David: Hi @u99of9 - Z6894 is indeed meant to be the equality function for all lightweight enum types. It's unfortunate that you can't...) [03:43:54] Milestone: I think I just completed Z25999! Controlling the precision and rounding in these quantity conversions has involved abusing the rational number type by deliberate unsimplification, but I think I'm happy that the outcome was able to achieve everything I'd hoped. Feel free to test it and break it by adding failing tests. [09:40:39] Z6894 is “set” as the equality function in the evaluated Type. I guess the issue is with the UI looking at the evaluated Type, or not looking…? (re @u99of9: Thanks David, the issue is that when they're "set" as the Z4K4 equality function for a Type, the main advantage is that when tes...) [09:43:05] Good to hear. Where do I see the evaluated type? (re @Al: Z6894 is “set” as the equality function in the evaluated Type. I guess the issue is with the UI looking at the evaluated Type, o...) [09:47:54] Easiest thing is to echo the reference, I think. (re @u99of9: Good to hear. Where can I see the evaluated type?) [09:50:44] Thanks. Yes that looks reasonable, although I'm curious where the English key label "element" comes from. (re @Al: Easiest thing is to echo the reference, I think.) [09:55:05] It’s always that. I guess it’s hardcoded in Z6984 🤷‍♂️ (re @u99of9: Thanks. Yes that looks reasonable, although I'm curious where the English key label "element" comes from.) [13:56:58] I’ve started a new table at [[Wikifunctions:Catalogue/Type handling#functions directly connected to type objects]] Pausing now for feedback (preferably [[Wikifunctions talk:Catalogue/Type handling|on-wiki]]). [20:49:05] Go for it (re @Al: I’ve started a new table at [[Wikifunctions:Catalogue/Type handling#functions directly connected to type objects]] Pausing now f...) [20:50:39] I actually wondered if such a table could be generated using the new html fragments and a function call (re @Al: I’ve started a new table at [[Wikifunctions:Catalogue/Type handling#functions directly connected to type objects]] Pausing now f...) [20:59:52] I haven’t written the row-generating function yet. I have a sandboxed hack, but inconsistent type representations and optional keys aren’t handled. [21:29:16] We need to use the Z-template here to keep the results multilingual. The future is still Wikitext! (re @u99of9: I actually wondered if such a table could be generated using the new html fragments and a function call) [21:30:17] One day we can call for ZID labels by language? (re @Al: We need to use the Z-template here to keep the results multilingual. The future is still Wikitext!) [21:35:31] One day, who knows… 🤷‍♂️ If the language isn’t specified, today, it defaults to the page-content language, which would be English in the Catalogue. (re @u99of9: One day we can call for ZID labels by language?) [21:37:02] Ah true, not the user language. Okay, nevermind. (re @Al: One day, who knows… 🤷‍♂️ If the language isn’t specified, today, it defaults to the page-content language, which would be Englis...) [21:40:52] I do mind, but we do what we can… with a cheerful smile 😏 (re @u99of9: Ah true, not the user language. Okay, nevermind.) [21:42:02] Language localised translation subpages, all with the same function call on them? [21:48:16] Conceivably. I think Denny’s been trying that out for 1298. (re @u99of9: Language localised translation subpages, all with the same function call on them?)