"Rune" <new### [at] runevisioncom> wrote in message 
news:446719ad@news.povray.org...
> "Chris B" wrote:
>> The main intention of this posting was to promote discussion on the 
>> re-organisation of the Categorisations and the Hierarchical organisation 
>> of the links pages on the povray.org site. See paragraphs 2 and 3 above.
>>
>> Any thoughts on this?
>
> Not on the structure directly, but I have a question regarding inclusion 
> of site links versus page links in the future.
>

Hi Rune,

You still probably get the prize for the closest yet :-)


> In the current links collection, sometimes a whole site with many pages 
> devoted to POV-Ray and other relevant resources have just a single link 
> pointing to the home page of the site, and a description that summarizes 
> the content of the entire site. One gross example is this one: "Site 
> contains various macro utilities and object files for download. Visit site 
> to see what is available." Other sites have several links pointing to 
> various relevant pages on the site, with detailed descriptions on which 
> resources can be found on each specific page.
>
> From the user's point of view, I guess the more detailed approach with 
> links to each page is the more helpful, so a lot of browsing on pages just 
> to find out what's actually on them can be avoided. However, naturally, it 
> will mean more links and more maintenance. This however could be helped if 
> people from the community could submit links themselves which would then 
> just have to be reviewed by a moderator before inclusion. Indeed authors 
> of pages could submit links themselves and doing the most of the work on 
> ensuring that the resources on their sites are optimally represented in 
> the links collection in the right categories and with the right 
> descriptions.
>
> However, looking at the current inconsistency, will there be any "policy" 
> on how detailed to go? How many links to different pages on the same site 
> is acceptable? (Some of the sites of the great POV-Ray community 
> contributors have dozens of pages, all relevant.)
>
> I just thought it might be a good idea to consider such things early, just 
> like the re-organization of the categories.
>
> Rune
> -- 
> http://runevision.com
>


I don't think anyone's looking at a policy for this at the moment and I 
would think that the 'best' approach is likely to vary depending on the 
organisation of the site being linked to.
I think that consolidating some of the categories and improving the 
descriptions may help with this.

One downside with the more detailed links is that they can more easily get 
broken when content moves (or in some cases where the extension is just 
changed from html to asp or dhtml).

Regards,
Chris B.

Post a reply to this message