Talk:National calendars of the Roman Rite

Title of the split

edit

First of all, splitting the article of the GRC is a good idea, although, in my humble opinion, it would have been better to make a single article for every regional calendar. Which brings me to my point: "National variants of the…" is a rather unlucky expression, as, up to my knowledge, they are called "regional (liturgical) calendar".--Medusahead (talk) 09:08, 4 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don’t think that splitting National calendars of the Roman Rite further would be a good idea. My reasons:
* each article could have a different format;
* all calendar propers in this articular are national calendars (which is a subgroup from particular calendars).
As for regional (liturgical) calendars: no, you are not right. You should read the Universal Norms on the Liturgical Year and the General Roman Calendar (esp Chapter II, Title I, 52.). Actually, there different type of the Roman Calendar according to UNLY:
* General Roman Calendar (or simply General Calendar);
* particular calendars (any and all of the calendars below);
* diocesan calendars;
* religious calendars;
* calendars for individual churches.
However, according to usage or (if you wish) the location where the particular particular calendar is used, we use additional calendar types:
* national calendars (celebrated by a single nation or country);
* regional calendars (celebrated by a particular region or even a group of countries or episcopal conferences);
* ‘continental’ calendars (this one is less often used term, as no one actually uses such a calendar, but every national calendar inherits celebrations first from the GRC, then from the continental calendar).
Therefore I think that the current article name is specific enough, because it lists national calendars and it does that for the Roman rite only. 7otto (talk) 23:20, 9 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
On a second thought, we might want to split the article by continents, however, I still think that splitting the articule even further gains no good. 7otto (talk) 23:25, 9 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Change the format to table and add a Change type column

edit

(Related to Talk:General_Roman_Calendar#National_calendars:_add_‘drop’_and_‘move’)

I think it would be much more readable if we change the format of the calendar propers to tables. Then we could sort the tables according to different columns.

Finally, I think a column with the type of change (addition, transfer to a different date, rank raise/lowering, addition of a title) would be nice to have.

For example, this could be a table for National calendars of the Roman Rite#Slovakia:

Date Celebration Rank Change type
23 April Saint Adalbert, bishop and martyr Memorial addition
24 April Saint George, martyr Optional Memorial transfer
29 April Saint Catherine of Siena, virgin and doctor of the Church, patroness of Europe Feast European rank raise and patronage addition
4 May Saint Florian, martyr Optional Memorial addition
11 May Blessed Sára Salkaházi, virgin and martyr Optional Memorial addition
16 May Saint John Nepomucene, priest and martyr Memorial addition
2 July Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Feast transfer
5 July Saints Cyril, monk, and Methodius, bishop, Slavic Missionaries, patrons of Europe Solemnity rank raise and transfer of a European addition
7 July Saint Anthony Zaccaria, priest Optional Memorial transfer
11 July Saint Benedict, abbot, patron of Europe Feast European rank raise and patronage addition
17 July Saints Andrew Zorard and Benedict, eremites Memorial addition
23 July Saint Bridget, religious, patroness of Europe Feast European rank raise and patronage addition
27 July Saint Gorazd and companions Memorial addition
30 July Blessed Zdenka Cecília Schelingová, virgin and martyr Optional Memorial addition
9 August Saint Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, virgin and martyr, patroness of Europe Feast European rank raise and patronage addition
18 August Saint Helena Optional Memorial addition
7 September Saints [Marko Krizin]], Melchior Grodziecki and Stephen Pongracz, priests and martyrs Memorial addition
15 September Our Lady of Sorrows, patroness of Slovakia Solemnity addition
16 October Saint Gall, priest Optional Memorial addition
25 October Saint Maurus, bishop Optional Memorial addition
26 October Dedication of consecrated churches whose date of Consecration is unknown Solemnity addition (where applicable)
2 November All Souls Memorial rank lowering
4 December Saint Barbara, virgin and martyr Optional Memorial addition
Thursday after Pentecost Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Eternal High Priest Feast addition

7otto (talk) 23:01, 9 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@7oto: I've actually been working on this same idea! Our systems are very similar. Mine currently isn't sortable, however (due to colspan cells); do you think there's value to sortability for this type of data? Jdcompguy (talk) 02:29, 10 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Well, sortability is not a must-have thing, but might be nice to have. Imagine a user might want to sort the celebration by ranks or celebration name or change type. It might be useful, but it is not a necessary feature. :)
I don’t mind removing sortability, but what gains do we have using colspans here? 7otto (talk) 17:54, 10 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
In my table draft I'm using rowspans (not colspans; my mistake) on the months, like this:
Month Day
January 27
28
31
February 2
3
I think it looks nice, but I'm just thinking out loud on the question of whether sortability is a greater advantage than the aesthetics of rowspan months. Jdcompguy (talk) 02:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Well, while it looks nice, how do you output dates of movable celebrations like Thursday after Pentecost? It is neither month nor date. Would you rowspan the cells?
That said, I like it from DRY point of view. 7otto (talk) 05:04, 11 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Jdcompguy, besides the issue of movable celebration dates, we need to add a Notes (or Remarks) column, as some celebrations currently have some notes added, esp when the celebration coicides which other celebration(s).
I’d like to update the celebration list format to use tables in the articles (gradually, not all at once), but I don’t want to decide the format on my own.
Other, related issues I’d like to see fixed (ideally alongside changing the format to table) are:
- remove canonisation level from links;
- capitalise first letters of titles in celebration names. 7otto (talk) 12:33, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply