Done. Symon Rottem http://blog.symbiotic-development.com
2010/9/1 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> > 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]> > >> 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]>: >>> >>>> 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=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]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<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]<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.
