[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Navigation, was Re: Idea : common dir and tree
Greg Ferguson wrote:
> On Jul 26, 2:49pm, Stein Gjoen wrote:
> > Subject: Re: Navigation, was Re: Idea : common dir and tree
> > Guylhem Aznar wrote:
> > ...
> > > Would you have time to sum up the current agreed propositions,
> > > including dir. tree?
> > I'll try:
> > Proposal v1.0
> Some questions/comments:
> - With many potential files/HOWTOs, these additional sub-directories
> (PDF, text, etc) will be virtually unnoticed. We need to provide
> pointers to the sub-directories within the index.html files.
Agreed. We might do it
- logically by listing each format for each HOWTO, with links that
point to the relevant sub directory
- structurally by having pointers straight to each sub directory for
those of us who like to browse more manually.
I'd like to see both but this is in the end a web design issue
rather than a file system layout issue.
> - Will we utilize the single-page HOWTOs or the multi-page HOWTOs?
Personally I don't like to page down huge numbers of short pages.
How about making small HOWTOs (less then say 10 pages) into single
files using --split=0 while the bigger HOWTOs remain splitted?
> - What about HOWTOs that currently are contained in their own
> sub-directory? We need to consider that (all DocBook-authored
> HOWTOs are like that).
I don't know how these work. Do they have to be in sub directories?
If so that would have to be sub directories below HTML/ but it
does make it harder to maintain the index.html files.
> - Need to provide a commonly-shared image directory, such as what
> we have now on www.linuxdoc.org (for call-outs, etc). Should be
> at the same level as the other sub-dirs (unless we munge the
> HTML to convert links/references).
Sorry, I don't quite understand this.
> - I can get you a file-count if need be (I need to know if the single
> or multi-page variants will be used).
> > text/ - same HOWTOS but as plain text
> > ...
> > PDF/ - same HOWTOS but as PDF
> > ...
> > PostScript/
> > ...
> > SGML/
> - Contains gzipped tar files or exploded (SGML) text + graphics files
> for each HOWTO? Again, possibly in their own sub-dirs.
If people install these files on their hard disk it is probably
because they have the capacity and the need in which case I feel
we can leave the files untarred and uncompressed.
If we are to make an LDP CD-ROM I feel we should have the files
uncompressed there since we then have all the space we need.
> - Do we need a split for linuxdoc v. docbook (?):
I had hoped we didn't need that. The first few lines of each file
identifies the DTD anyway.
> > ...
> > HTML/
> > ...
> - Is it just me, or is anyone else annoyed by upper/mixed-case? :-)
> I'd personally like to see lower-case used for all the sub-dir names,
> but that's simply a personal preference.
Normally I have mixed feelings about it but in this case I favour
starting the main sub directories with a capital letter so they
appear at the top of a directory listing. Perhaps text/ should
then rather be Text/ to keep in the same style.
The HOWTO/ directory will probably be full of HTML files so
we should make the contents sub directories visible.
> - What goes in the 'HTML' directory, given that all HTML HOWTOs will
> be in /usr/share/HOWTO ? Is it still necessary?
I might have misunderstood but I got the impression the majority
wanted HTML HOWTOs in HTML/ and I guess it can be an advantage to
keep the root clean as it will hold a lot of navigational files.
> > GUIDES/ - the Guides in HTML format
> - Again, a decision on upper/lower/mixed case..perhaps:
> HOWTO, FAQ, guides, etc. Again, my personal preference.
> > Contents:
> > [...]
> > The index.html marked with (*) is based on the main page you see
> > when you browse http://www.LinuxDoc.org/ with some minor exceptions:
> > - the links from that page point to files on disk using relative
> > file:// URLs. Remember many do not have online access.
> All links on www.linuxdoc.org are currently relative (and work
> in a local/non-web-server environment). We needed to have it this
> way for our mirror sites.
That probably makes things a bit easier. We will still need some
kind of script to turn http:// into file:// and add the extra links.
I any case I suspect we are going to need a fair bit of scripts
to maintain and produce all this.
> > - added links that point to the corresponding area at www.LinuxDoc.org
> > in order to get the latest copy for those who are online.
> > Example: the link looks like "Guides [web]"
> > where Guides points to file://guides.html
> > and [web] points to http://www.linuxdoc.org/guides.html
> Very good idea.
> > [...]
> > (PS: I am going on a 3 week holiday starting this weekend and I
> > am unlikely to be reachable over the net during this period. The
> > entry to LWN has been submitted and might make it for this weeks
> > issue).
> I hate to switch gears, but was there ever any resolution or
> follow-up on the c.o.l.a posting problem?
Sadly no results yet. There is a line about this problem in the
LWN entry (which didn't appear in this weeks issue, hopefully
next week) that I hope will provoke a response. If that doesn't
work I'll send a request and notice to c.o.l.announce to inform
about the lacklustre performance of the alleged moderator.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com