Yeah, I agree - each page should be independent and cohesive - I don't
mind having a small few paragraph pages, as long as they are covering
one entire small topic. I would generally make a call based on - would I
link to this page from some other page, and would I be able to name that
link in one or two words.
I'm trying to partition the doco for Windsor according to this rule to
avoid having either huge monster pages as well as like you described
tiny pages that provide no value.
Symon - would you mind adding this info to wiki conrtibution guide please?
Krzysztof
On 1/09/2010 11:25 PM, Symon Rottem wrote:
On the same line, navigation, is the issue I mentioned a few weeks
back; the smaller articles that make up a subject need to be more
actively combined to avoid lots of tiny pages that contain little or
no information. Since most of these types of page have no link to the
following or previous page in the subject it can become very difficult
to navigate.
For example:
http://stw.castleproject.org/MonoRail.Getting-Started-Introduction.ashx
vs.
http://stw.castleproject.org/MonoRail.Getting-Started.ashx#Introduction
I made an attempt in some of the sections of the
Monorail documentation (such as the example above) to address this
issue, however there is still a lot of work to be done of this nature
across all the different documentation subsets.
Cheers,
Symon.
Symon Rottem
http://blog.symbiotic-development.com
2010/9/1 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Thanks Michael - that's the kind of feedback we're looking for.
1. I agree about the main page. I suck at UI, but I tried to make
it a little bit more accessible by adding the links at the top. I
agree completely though - we should have the links to projects on
the left side menu.
2. Search should be brought to a more visible spot on the page.
3. Anything else that you find particularily hard to deal with?
And not just problems - if you have suggestions as well how to
improve that - we're all ears :)
The STW when done will be integrated with the main site (replace
it?) so yes - linking to
http://www.castleproject.org/
is the right thing I guess.
cheers and thanks again for the feedback.
Krzysztof
On 1/09/2010 8:41 PM, Michael Maddox wrote:
This may come across as complaining, but I'm really just trying to
address Henry's "it seems that people isn't accessing the
inner pages
of stw" comment from my personal perspective.
ScrewTurn Wiki, IMHO, has horrible default navigation.
If I go to:
http://stw.castleproject.org/
And look at the left navigation panel, I don't see a link for
ActiveRecord (or anything useful really). In fact, visually
scanning
the landing page, it's hard to find the ActiveRecord link.
I think it's not very inviting to users to drill down. I
blame this
completely on ScrewTurn Wiki and it's the main reason I won't
recommend that product even though I know it is one of the
better .NET
Wikis. The Castle project is the first attempt I've seen to
workaround STW's navigation issues that has had any amount of
success
(if I work at it, I can find what I want eventually).
For comparison, if I go to this page:
http://www.castleproject.org/
The projects link at the top seems like the place to find
ActiveRecord
and I am rewarded for clicking on it (assuming I don't bother to
scroll down on the first landing page).
Moving on... I find this page:
http://www.castleproject.org/activerecord/documentation/trunk/index.html
Much easier to deal with than this one:
http://stw.castleproject.org/Active%20Record.MainPage.ashx
Although the graphical design of the former helps, I think the
formatting and collection of links could be somewhat
replicated in STW
without involving a designer (time and effort not withstanding).
Honestly, as a documentation user, I avoid the STW site if
possible
even though I know the content is more likely to be accurate /
up to
date, because I find it unpleasant (primarily due to
navigation and
incompleteness of the move).
I'm very appreciative of the effort that has gone into the STW
site to
date. That said, not enough work has gone into it yet that I
will use
it *first*.
One other thing related to the STW site: I'm hesitant to put
links to
http://stw.castleproject.org/ on my blog, etc. as I know that
URL will
eventually change. I figure the http://www.castleproject.org/
URLs
are safer to link to even though I don't really have any
evidence to
support that belief. While you would probably rather I link
to the
latest documentation, I'm instead intentionally choosing to
link to
what I believe is a more future-proof URL.
-Michael Maddox
http://www.Capprime.com/About.htm
2010/8/31 Henry Conceição<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
No, I'm not. The stw has some link(s) to using. Also there are
bookmarks, blog posts, etc. Even after the link remotion
of the using
and the switch to stw, using has almost twice more
visitors than stw.
The api site is almost dead, we practically don't receive
visitors
there. So it isn't a big deal.
We should only remove the current project main pages after
we fix the
wiki layout, imho.
But what concerns me the most, is that it seems that
people isn't
accessing the inner pages of stw. I don't know the exact
reason: maybe
they googled the wrong result, maybe they couldn't find
what they
want, maybe they found it clumsy and left. Check the reports:
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B32splxWlkuqNTdhOWViMmUtYTBjZi00Y2ZhLWJkZGItYTkxYzMwN2U1ZWE2&sort=name&layout=list&num=50
<https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B32splxWlkuqNTdhOWViMmUtYTBjZi00Y2ZhLWJkZGItYTkxYzMwN2U1ZWE2&sort=name&layout=list&num=50>
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B32splxWlkuqMTJjOTgwYWUtZjlkZC00NDQ1LWFiZTgtZWU3N2M4ZjQ3ZWJm&sort=name&layout=list&num=50
<https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B32splxWlkuqMTJjOTgwYWUtZjlkZC00NDQ1LWFiZTgtZWU3N2M4ZjQ3ZWJm&sort=name&layout=list&num=50>
Cheers,
Henry Conceição
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Castle Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:castle-project-devel%[email protected]>.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Castle Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle
Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
