"Chris B" <c_b### [at] btconnectcomnospam> wrote:
> .. I'm proposing
> changes to a number of aspects of the structure and would appreciate
> feedback about whether people think these changes are a good or bad idea.
>
>   o   The current structure for example has a category for 'Include Files',
> one for 'Macros' and one for 'Objects'. Although this may at first seem
> logical, many Object definitions and Macro definitions are contained in
> Include files and many Macros generate Objects. I've therefore suggested
> that these 3 sections be merged.

An excellent idea!

Another thought:  There are times when a particular discussion/question in
"general" or "advanced" begs for an image to be presented *there*, to
clarify the concepts being discussed.   Currently (as I understand it) such
an image should instead be posted in  "binaries:images" ...which seems
somewhat "out of place" to me (and necessitates cross-referencing in both
categories--not to mention the possibility of follow-up discussions being
split between both locations.)  "binaries:images" is, to my mind, a place
for WIPS and finished work.  An image associated with a question should
logically be consolidated into one post. I suppose what I'm getting at is a
more open policy toward posting an image --when necessary -- in the
"general" or "advanced" sections. This IS done every now and then, but I've
always assumed the practice to be frowned upon. Clarifying or relaxing that
policy would be helpful.

Ken W.

Post a reply to this message