As you can see, I'm getting errors with the named reference "ws"; after reading Help:List-defined references, I'm still not sure what I'm doing wrong. Any experts about? -- Beland (talk) 06:02, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Checking: weird. When I copy full template code, with the /doc, in my User:DePiep/sandbox2 (Userspace), the red texts do not show. The refs show orderly. (However, that clean show does not look like 'as intended', we'd expect reference "a." and "b." only right).

Could it be that, when we change that presentation into a more 'intended' one, the red error might be gone too? (btw, I'm going offline and one can edit as preferred, don't wait for me). -DePiep (talk) 10:13, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Huon managed to at least fix the error. He wrote the following on my personal talk page. -- Beland (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea why, but changing the order of the references within the {{reflist}} template helped. Personally I'd say the better solution would be to take apart the group of list-defined nested references and instead use less interlaced components. Huon (talk) 17:31, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• I feel that the "within ][" column doesn't help us much enough to see the actual width of a whitespace character. How about giving all demos "background-color" attribute? something like this:

here's the code: <span style="color:navy;background-color:yellow"><span style="background-color:blue"><nowiki>]</nowiki></span>anyspace<span style="color:navy;background-color:blue"><nowiki>[</nowiki></span></span>
We can give them a new column if we need to keep the colorless demos. Wbxshiori (talk) 12:42, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

On my browser, the ◀︎ ▶︎ symbols render as emojis (i.e. ◀️ ▶️) in the following table (only for zero width joiner for whatever reason). This can be fixed with variant selectors, but they may be copy-pasted with the space if someone tries to copy it directly from the article. Are there other ways of fixing this?

The coloured "whitespaces" (more like "greenblocks" now) look really bad. The brackets ][ were fine in all browsers and machines I ever used personally and only showed where the characters started and ended, rather than cover them in anything. In my view, the marsh green only serves to confuse as to what it is supposed to illustrate, as there in fact are no such green characters in reality, only spaces between things, which is exactly what the brackets illustrated. Maybe this is a very subjective thing, but that’s my view anyway, and I want the brackets back (nothing against the arrow version but it had technical problems as noted previously.) — Knyȝt (talk) 07:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree that visually it looks worse. It also makes it hard to select the space character to copy it, since the color of the spaces is very close to their color when selected. I would prefer reverting to either the arrows or brackets. 50.202.84.139 (talk) 17:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)