Before I saw this, I edited it the other way around :-) The reasoning is this.
There are some cases where there was a KDE3 version and a KDE4 version where comments didn't apply to both, so we needed an indicator. There was also in my mind the future need to remove KDE3-specific material once it is no longer used, therefore the KDE3 icon should be linked to a (hidden) category. It's hidden purely because its purpose is operational, not of any value to the reader. Since it is likely to be some years before KDE4 is deprecated I don't see any need for that to be linked to a category (and it would be easy to add such a link if it becomes useful).
Until the advent of RHEL 6 KDE 3 was still being used by a substantial number of people. Now all the enterprise distros have moved over to KDE4, that leaves the Trinity project people. My own opinion is that we should wait to see whether the Trinity project thrives. If it does, we leave things as they are. If it disappears, we should then remove the KDE 3 content.
Any other opinions?
I agree about the hidden category. However, I don't think that was what Abella was questioning. Rather, it was the displaying of the icons - The KDE3 displays inline while the KDE4 forces a paragraph break, placing itself between.
My feeling is, that we need the hidden KDE3 category (and we probably don't need one for KDE4) but that the displying of the two should be the same, and in fact like the KDE3 one.
Yes, but by editing it to make it virtually the same template as KDE3 I should have fixed that as well :-D Didn't test it, though, so