Okeedokeee! The potential customers have spoken!

We can have all of the following:
1)  A povray webring-like structure to html pages;
2)  URL's on the html pages that say "Save As..  this link as to save the
zip files for this tutorial"
3)  Every tut in its own subdirectory;
4?)  Something to enable "html cripples" who want to scrounge around in the
dumpsters themselves to understand what is in the directories.
Q:  Am I correct that those wanting to look at a collection in the way
Wlodzimierz is proposing would need some sort of TXT file in the
subdirectory itself to understand the context of the files?  Or a non-html
"povray webring-like" txt page for the whole assembly?

Chris Huff wrote:

> In article <3A1### [at] my-dejanewscom>, gre### [at] my-dejanewscom
> wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Who said anything about .zip's? And what is wrong with linking to pages
> in their own folders instead of having everything in one place?
> Also, what if people don't want to have the CD in their drive all the
> time and don't want to copy the whole thing to their HD?
> The tutorials should be accessible by using the operating system as well
> as a main HTML page...
>
> > 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.
>
> Again, who said anything about .zip's? The tutorials should be in
> immediately readable form, uncompressed .html, .txt, .pov, and image
> files, not .zip or other compressed formats.
> However, being uncompressed doesn't mean they have to be jumbled
> together in one folder...
>
> > 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.
>
> Jumbling everything in one directory will definitely make it more
> difficult to maintain. You will have to deal with name conflicts between
> tutorials, updates to individual tutorials, making sure you link to the
> right files, etc....if you have separate directories, you only have to
> worry about the directory names, which the tutorials themselves can
> ignore, being completely self-contained.
> And for accessing the files...how is sorting through several hundred
> cryptically named files to find the specific set of files you need
> easier than finding one well-named directory out of a hundred? There
> *are* going to be people who want to pick out individual tutorials to
> study without having to have the CD in all the time...
>
> --
> Christopher James Huff
> Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
> TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
>
> <><

Post a reply to this message