On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 08:18:00PM +0100, Marco Budde wrote: > Am 13.04.98 schrieb schwarz # monet.m.isar.de ... > > CS> but this structure is less than intuitive (at least, > CS> for me, but I've heard this from a lot of users too). > > Well, the structure is not the problem. But some developers have choosen > the wrong diretory for their program.
For some packages, there is no best match. Where should I put svncviewer? In X11, because it can connect to an X server, in net, because it works in a network, or in graphics, because it is a svgalib program? > CS> I'd prefer a much `deeper' structure. Below is a first attempt for such a > > Have you read the article about designing a user interface on WWW pages in > the c#t (11/97?). A deep structure is not a good idea. Remember that the > programs itself can create subdirectories and that we have support for > other languages. So you have to walk to 5 or more directories in worst > cases. I think we can all live with this. I have no problems reading books that use 5 levels of sections. I most of the time don't have to think about it. Just let us make sure that the up, next and back buttons do work properly. > CS> - in some places it's hard to determine the correct section of a > CS> manual--I'd prefer to put such manuals in several sections > > No, please not. This is very confusing for the user. In some cases you > could create an own root directory. ? Did you ever wrote an index for a book? It is the most important part of a book that transfers information. I want to find the information I seek. I don't want to look for every possible section the program could be in. I have an idea where to look, and it should be found there. If several sections are appropriate, I want to find it in all sections. I find it very confusing if I remember reading something about XXX, and not finding a reference to it in neither XXX, nor xxx, xxy, XXx or XxX. > CS> Here is what I'm thinking of: > CS> > CS> General documents [general] > CS> Debian FAQ > ^^^^^ > This is a document? Or a directory? We have a document with this name. The indentation level makes it clear that CS thinks it is a document. > CS> Debian META Manual > CS> Linux HOWTO's and FAQs > > Take for example the Debian documents. How many documents have we got? 10? > One directory for all would be enough (both user + developer). If we support several subdirectories, there is no need to use them all, right. But nobody said this, too. But we have a lot of different packages in the "doc" section. I would be very confused by all the name of the section and the variety of packages that it contains. The debian ftp server structure is no good document storing structure. > CS> Installation instructions [install] > CS> Debian Installation Manual > CS> dselect Beginner's Guide > CS> Debian Release Notes > > That should moved to the debian section. > CS> Linux Hardware HOWTO > > ? That#s part of the HOWTO directory. Yes. But it is *also* very important for installation. I have an installation problem. Fine, I'll look in the installation section of the debian document web server in the internet or at a friends machine. I find the Hardware HOWTO, and I realize that my problems could be originated in a not supported isdn card. The HOWTO section is flooded with documents and I only look in the HOWTO section if I already know that I need a HOWTO. Marco, I simply fail to understand why you object to order the documents in a senseful way. The ftp structure is simply not intended to be used as a documentation ordering. I also can't see how you can fail to see that multiple indexing is *essential* and very, very much useful. > CS> User's manuals [users] > > Why do we need such a root directory? Where#s the advantage? The advantage is that you can constrain as a user to manuals that are useful to you. I would be very confused as a user if I find documents about libc6 function calls if I only want to know why libc6 needs kernel-headers-2.0.32. > CS> Developer's manuals [devel] > CS> > CS> C documentation > > [devel/c]? Not a bad idea. Maybe [devel/libs] would be nice. Fine, you actually see that subcategories are very useful. > CS> Perl documentation > > [devel/perl]? Good idea. > > CS> Debian's packaging system [admin/packaging] > CS> dselect Beginner's Guide > > admin? -> debian ? What do you want to tell me? Sometimes I find your abbreviated stile hard to follow. We all have little time, b I tnk w c spll a l sm th o. I think debians packaging system is more useful for developers, whereas debian specific instructions to mainatin the system (info about init procedure, kernel etc) are useful in debian and probably even a seperate admin section. > I would suggest simply [debian/devel] and [debian/user]. It#s bad to > create a directory for only three documents. Others may follow. We should have a first draft, that is useful for at least a year without major modifications and that is sufficiently complete that it allows to place some documents in more than one place. Thank you, Marcus -- "Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
