 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a12ab3a@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote:
> Why it would be a pain? I can't think of any reason why creating 100
> subdirectories, one for each tutorial, would be difficult.
> And the value add to to user would be huge. Just imagine searching for
> a specific tutorial among 500 html files (supposing that every tutorial
> has 5 html files in average).
> Instead, if each tutorial is inside a well-named subdirectory, searching
> for the correct tutorial is extremely easy.
>
> I still think that the idea is completely crazy.
I agree!
There is a reason why file systems support directories for decades now,
there is *no* legitimate reason for not using directories!
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Greg M. Johnson <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote:
: 1) A povray webring-like structure to html pages;
Why it has to be this complicated?
Do you know what does the word "index" in the filename "index.html" mean?
And please, you can remove unused quotes. You don't have to quote
everything.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> 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?
if you just name subdirectories as
clouds1, clouds2, focblur, globals, isosrf1, isosrf2, layers, loops,
macro, media1, media2, pigments, plant, sky, tree1, tree2, variabls,
water1, water2, water3
everyone recognize subject of tutorial, I think
remember that this is only for fast recognize not for decorative
presentation
I think you don't want prepare cdrom for one watch
I hope, you want povers to use your "product" every day
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
>
> Why it has to be this complicated?
>
> Do you know what does the word "index" in the filename "index.html" mean?
>
An index file sounds like a good idea, although IIRC Greg planned some
searching function for the whole CD, that would make it obsolete. I
personally would not see much use in a ring structure.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The main collection "Your 10 Best Images" will have pages set up so that
someone could see the thumbnails for:
all the 3D Toons,
all the work by Warp,
all the work by Panamanians,
all the work by the people who actually can write their own raytracers
all the landscapes,
all the images made using sPatch modelling,
all the images with the word "media" in the keywords,
*or* the entirety of information on Greg's image #3, the fractals one.
It **shall be** html-driven. I bought the first IRTC CD-ROM (alas, only
the first; Amazon.com 1-click didn't work on subsequent CD's). That CD's
layout ONLY benefited the person interested in seeing all the SciFi or
Flight images at one time. A Panamanian graphic design editor or a
frustrated novice using sPatch or the 3D Toons partisan will all have very
different reasons for picking up the CD.
Wlodzimierz ABX Skiba wrote:
> if you just name subdirectories as
> clouds1, clouds2, focblur, globals, isosrf1, isosrf2, layers, loops,
> macro, media1, media2, pigments, plant, sky, tree1, tree2, variabls,
> water1, water2, water3
This could be done but certainly must not be the only way of locating the
tuts. What if someone used media to make water? What if someone wrote a
sPatch tutorial to make trees? A brilliant recursive macro to make a
trees? We could make some kind of dual structure for the tuts, where there
is one big TXT file which simply lists a title or something about every
tut--the povray.binaries.tutorials structure you are insisting on.
By a "povray webring structure", I mean both of the following:
I) a table of URL's added to every page which at least say
go back to tut search page,
go to next tut by this author,
go to next tutorial on macros,
go to next tutorial on trees,
Save this tutorial's zip file as,
go to CD main page, etc.
and
II) Every tutorial looks vaguely similar to my own
(http://www.geocities.com/pterandon/boids.html) much moreso than like p.b.t.
. IMO this will provide much more benefit to the purchaser wanting to use
it every day than having the only structure on the CD being like p.b.t..
I have a STRONG personal adversion to being forced to unzip a few dozen
files to see if it is what I'm looking for, so I insist that some kind of
html search page is part of the tutorials section on the CD.
Also note that the 10best.raytrace.com copyright (
http://10best.raytrace.com/10bestcopy.txt ) says:
<<5.1. Distribution is not allowed on any storage media that is accessible
over
the Internet or similar Wide Area Networks. This prohibits the use of these
files on FTP, WWW or gopher sites, among others. Distribution authorized in
(1) through (4) above is excluded from this restriction.
5.2. Distribution is not allowed on any CD-ROMs or other high capacity media
(optical disks, DVD, etc.) excepting those that are produced in accordance
with
(1) through (4) above.>>
> I think you don't want prepare cdrom for one watch
> I hope, you want povers to use your "product" every day
Yes, I trust your noble motive in this regard and thanks for putting up with
my ornery counter-suggestions.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Greg M. Johnson wrote in message <3A142E5D.75A6A9EC@my-dejanews.com>...
>Wlodzimierz ABX Skiba wrote:
>> if you just name subdirectories as
>> clouds1, clouds2, focblur, globals, isosrf1, isosrf2, layers, loops,
>> macro, media1, media2, pigments, plant, sky, tree1, tree2, variabls,
>> water1, water2, water3
>
> This could be done but certainly must not be the only way of locating
the
> tuts. What if someone used media to make water? What if someone wrote
a
> sPatch tutorial to make trees? A brilliant recursive macro to make a
> trees?
I'm not talking about watching your cd-rom
I'm talking about fast serching through directories with a little memory
yes, when I write list above I know that you can point that two
problems are described in one tutorial
but I write about situation when I know what I'm looking for
I exactly remember which tutoriual, I only want small part of source
(i.e. settings for media or radiosity)
> We could make some kind of dual structure for the tuts, where there
> is one big TXT file which simply lists a title or something about
every
> tut--the povray.binaries.tutorials structure you are insisting on.
yes, this is used in many ftps, good idea I think
> > I think you don't want prepare cdrom for one watch
> > I hope, you want povers to use your "product" every day
>
> Yes, I trust your noble motive in this regard and thanks for putting
up with
> my ornery counter-suggestions.
I didn't want be ironic, I hope you don't think that
my english could be raw
sometimes I must use elipses to express what I want
for example tonight I plan write very long post to p.u-p
but I'm affraid about proper words
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
>
[...]
>
> By a "povray webring structure", I mean both of the following:
> I) a table of URL's added to every page which at least say
> go back to tut search page,
> go to next tut by this author,
> go to next tutorial on macros,
> go to next tutorial on trees,
> Save this tutorial's zip file as,
> go to CD main page, etc.
>
> and
> II) Every tutorial looks vaguely similar to my own
> (http://www.geocities.com/pterandon/boids.html) much moreso than like p.b.t.
> . IMO this will provide much more benefit to the purchaser wanting to use
> it every day than having the only structure on the CD being like p.b.t..
>
That sounds quite good to me, but adding a list with all the tuts
including the categories they are registered under would not hurt IMO and
could be useful for a quick overview etc.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
> That sounds quite good to me, but adding a list with all the tuts
> including the categories they are registered under would not hurt IMO and
> could be useful for a quick overview etc.
Certainly part of the plan for the html main page and "search engine." The
question is to what degree to accomodate someone looking only at the raw directory
structure and not the html pages.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
