Chris Huff wrote:

> In article <3a12658e@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
> wrote:
>
> >   This idea sounds completely crazy to me.
>
> I agree...purposely make it impossible to tell what files belong to what
> tutorials and what their purpose is? Each tutorial should live in it's
> own folder, all of these folders could be put in the same place. Then
> you don't have to worry about file names, just folder names.

Let's back up one question.

I'd like the collection to look something much more like the povray webring
than say povray.binaries.tutorials.  I'd like it to be linked HTML pages
rather than a collection of ZIP files.
Q1: Is the opposition to this proposal based on an assumption of a pile of
ZIP's? IMO, if we go with a pile of ZIP's (even in own subdirectories),
let's just stick with p.b.t., as the CD will offer no value-add to anyone.

I'm just thinking suppose we end up with 100 separate tuts. It is going to
be difficult for the person who wants to "get at" the information by a means
other than the official HTML paths, regardless of 100 subdirectories or
100*(2 to 10) files in one big directory.   I'm thinking that it will be a
much bigger pain to write the CD if there are 100 subdirectories, with
little value add to the user.

Q2: Isn't this similar to the IRTC rewriting your carefully chosen file
names to suit its purposes, as it dumps everything into one folder, no?

Post a reply to this message