 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rune" <new### [at] runevision com> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wow, that looks like a time-consuming task! Thanks for showing the concept
in visual form, too.
Is this going to mean a change of the www.povray.org home page links, or is
it just within the Links part there?
I'm just a little curious about how it might get more complex or simplified
once the change takes place, that's why I ask. It will obviously mean many
more pages to jump through, anyhow, won't it? Or is it being planned as a
page of link *groups* for the most part?
Something I wish I had tried to get changed over a year ago is the two links
going to my defunct AOL account where I had first used web space to store
things and that got outdated and I finally quit it altogether. Still have it
mostly mirrored elsewhere in two other places (one is
http://webpages.charter.net/omniverse/ using same file names as before).
Which leads me to ask, are the People's Pages going to be kept (and updated)
or removed? If updated, how will people go about adding/changing it? For
that matter, has a submittal form been planned? And if there is one already
I'm being stupid, of course, since I hadn't noticed anything yet while
looking the site over again.
Sorry if I'm asking too many questions at once. Main concern of mine is only
about the potential complexity your chart got me thinking of. ;)
Bob Hughes
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bob H" <omniverse@charter%net> wrote in message
news:4468d8be$1@news.povray.org...
> Wow, that looks like a time-consuming task! Thanks for showing the concept
> in visual form, too.
>
> Is this going to mean a change of the www.povray.org home page links, or
> is it just within the Links part there?
>
Hi Bob,
The time consuming bit is updating the links themselves which is underway. I
think that changing the categories should be fairly quick as it's mainly
just a question of putting a new number against the 1044 records in the file
we're working off before it gets loaded back into the database. This
exercise only deals with the bit under the 'Resources' tab referred to as
the 'Links collection' (http://www.povray.org/resources/links/).
> I'm just a little curious about how it might get more complex or
> simplified once the change takes place, that's why I ask. It will
> obviously mean many more pages to jump through, anyhow, won't it? Or is it
> being planned as a page of link *groups* for the most part?
The categories I've suggested should reduce the number of web pages that you
need to go through to get to individual links pages by flattening out the
hierarchy a little bit. It could increase the number of links on a page
(some of the existing categories only have 2 links on a page to themselves).
The basic structure would remain the same as at present (ie. a hierarchical
structure). The boxes listed down the left hand side of the diagram would be
the top-level category headings displayed on the first page, with most
categories leading straight into a links page, but a couple containing
further categories, as is shown by the boxes further to the right.
>
> Something I wish I had tried to get changed over a year ago is the two
> links going to my defunct AOL account where I had first used web space to
> store things and that got outdated and I finally quit it altogether. Still
> have it mostly mirrored elsewhere in two other places (one is
> http://webpages.charter.net/omniverse/ using same file names as before).
> Which leads me to ask, are the People's Pages going to be kept (and
> updated) or removed? If updated, how will people go about adding/changing
> it?
This is currently a one off exercise to get the links updated. There were
282 broken links out of the 1044 currently on the site, so there was quite a
high chance that people would hit a broken link. We've found new locations
for about half of the broken ones and will be checking the content on the
rest to make sure its still relevant. I'll post a list of the ones we
haven't found soon so that anyone who knows a new location for that content
can tell us. Those we don't find new locations for, we'll delete.
I've updated the two links you had to the URL you've given above.
I'm proposing that the People's Pages get split into two. With a category
where POV-Team members (present and past) can link to whatever they want
plus a category for 'Galleries' which would links off to the various
POV-Ring lists as well as to the IRTC and the Hall of Fame. This would
reduce the need for maintaining these links, but would leave nowhere for
direct links to user's galleries. POV-Ray users would need to register their
galleries on one or more of the POV-Rings.
Do people think this is a reasonable idea or not?
In the proposed layout, links to 'links' pages, such as one of the two URLs
on your site that you referred to above, would go into the top-level
category 'Related Links Sites'.
> For that matter, has a submittal form been planned? And if there is one
> already I'm being stupid, of course, since I hadn't noticed anything yet
> while looking the site over again.
The current exercise is intended to be something that can be completed
without absorbing the POV-Team member's time, so won't in itself result in
any changes to the future management of the links pages (such as creating a
submittal form). Once we've determined the category hierarchy that we want
to implement for the links file that we're in the process of updating, I
think we'll be able to invite people to submit new links to us before we
send the file back to Chris Cason for loading into the povray.org links
database. If this is possible I'll start another thread inviting new links.
>
> Sorry if I'm asking too many questions at once. Main concern of mine is
> only about the potential complexity your chart got me thinking of. ;)
>
> Bob Hughes
>
I'm a bit worried that the diagram may not be clear. Looking back at it a
week after drawing it I think I should have made it more apparent that the
boxes on the left are just the top level of the hierarchy and that it's
meant to be simpler than the current layout.
Regards,
Chris B.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris B" <c_b### [at] btconnectcomnospam> wrote in message
news:4468fb15$1@news.povray.org...
>
> I should have made it more apparent that the boxes on the left are just
> the top level of the hierarchy and that it's meant to be simpler than the
> current layout.
Actually, that much was already obvious enough, to me anyway. Just took some
long looks before I could imagine what might actually be changed then that's
where I began to get confused.
There's a lot of breaking it down into subcategories I hadn't realized might
be happening with this reorganization idea when I first read it here. So
many different things. I started imagining web pages nested a dozen deep to
get to a final destination!
> I've updated the two links you had to the URL you've given above.
Thanks for delving into that to change those to my more permanent ISP. I was
willing to wait for any options made to everyone for making or submitting
changes ourselves, supposing that might happen someday. Doubt I'll ever have
another ISP in this decade or the next so maybe that won't be needing
another change again. I've opted to get a domain and web host to mirror
stuff onto this time with the hopes both won't get abandoned.
> I'm proposing that the People's Pages get split into two. With a category
> where POV-Team members (present and past) can link to whatever they
> want plus a category for 'Galleries' which would links off to the various
> POV-Ring lists as well as to the IRTC and the Hall of Fame. This would
> reduce the need for maintaining these links, but would leave nowhere for
> direct links to user's galleries. POV-Ray users would need to register
> their galleries on one or more of the POV-Rings.
Not sure I have any input concerning this right now... maybe...
One of my People Page's links (omniverse) has a POV-Ring junction on the
page, almost exclusively unless you read the fine print there, with the
links to the rest of my site embedded into an image. My site(s) can be a
haphazard mess to stumble into. I know many, many people are joined to that
ring or others but I must wonder of the vast majority of people who aren't.
It all comes down to the willingness to add those links to their own site or
whether they might prefer to only connect up at povray.org, so to speak. I
can understand the difficulty involved for the maintainer of this site if
the additional workload of fielding and editing submissions from whatever
there is to submit, so maybe that (personal pages, like blogs, galleries,
shared files, info) should be considered as limited if done at all. In other
words, I don't really have any constructive ideas on the topic I'm just
rambling. :)
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bob H" <omniverse@charter%net> wrote in message
news:446917e2$1@news.povray.org...
>
> I don't really have any constructive ideas on the topic I'm just rambling.
> :)
>
> Bob
>
Ramblings are also welcomed :-)
Chris B.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 12 May 2006 17:54:36 -0500, Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>
>> The trouble
>> with Wikis is that there is spamming, so they have to be set up to be
>> secure, which again requires time of the webmaster (Chris Cason)...
>
> At least with mediawiki, that's pretty easy to configure as long as you
> have an authentication source set up.
I'm open to the idea of setting one up, provided editing is only open to
selected users (at least initially).
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 18 May 2006 02:16:31 +1000, Chris Cason wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> [quoted text muted]
>
> I'm open to the idea of setting one up, provided editing is only open to
> selected users (at least initially).
With mediawiki, you can require a user be authenticated prior to editing
(that's how I use it); you can also disable the ability for users to
self-register - someone who holds "sysop" or "bureaucrat" status would be
able to create the accounts.
I know others (Twiki is one, I think - though I have no personal
experience with setting that one up - just as a user) can do more granular
rights management, not just for writing, but also access to read certain
sections. We use both Mediawiki and Twiki internally at work.
I'd be happy to help out in any way I can, time permitting (of course).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
