having chm in downloadable packages is a good idea; nontheless the good thing about api is that I can handle an url to somebody, I can also do that with github (as I did with fisheye), but it's good to have MSDN kind of documentation of the API indexed by google:
http://www.google.fr/search?q=site:api.castleproject.org I think it still has a value to investigate building a teamcity configuration to handle deployment of api website, however not high priority On 4 sep, 18:55, Henry Conceição <[email protected]> wrote: > What if we include the a chm file generation on the build? That should > be easier than maintain the api website with multiple projects and > etc. > > Cheers, > Henry Conceição > > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Gauthier Segay > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > The discussion goes in great lenghts with interesting elements just > > want to add small bits: > > > on stw, the breadcrumb is useless/misleading, browser back button does > > a better job and it should be removed (it's just showing list of pages > > you have visited), what I like with official documentation has it has > > been since ages is that the layout is totally uncluttered and focus on > > content readability > > > api subdomain should NOT go, I prefer that than reading XML tag soup > > in my working copy, it should be updated by teamcity and probably have > > master and stable release, now I understand it's not gonna happen soon > > due to project separation > > > I'll try to get back on topics that strike clear opinion, and to > > contribute more proactively to the wiki > > > On 1 sep, 14:49, Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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/onmy blog, etc. as I know that URL will > >> > eventually change. I figure thehttp://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=0B32splxWlkuqNTdhOWViMmUtYTBjZi00Y2Zh... > >> >>https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B32splxWlkuqMTJjOTgwYWUtZjlkZC00NDQ1... > > >> >> 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]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://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.
