I guess it's valuable to keep at least one version of the 4.x
documentation online for those still using 4.x.

As far as redirecting everything to the http://tapestry.apache.org/,
that seems like it would break a lot of links and search results,
making the user's search experience worse rather than better, right?


On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 2:11 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <[email protected]> wrote:
> Maybe we should just replace the old web sites with .htaccess files
> that redirect back to the main page, http://tapestry.apache.org/
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Ah, yes I see. Agree on all you said, and we definitely want to get
>> that custom search into the template as well. At least to me it seems
>> that the Maven based documentation for 5.x get most of the hits. I
>> don't think we need to worry about 3.x documentation too much. I'm
>> afraid that bulk edit with specific content links may not work very
>> well as the documentation structure has changed. Simply adding the
>> same link to the (root of) latest documentation on every existing page
>> might increase the visibility of the wiki-based documentation in the
>> search rankings though. I'm not a PMC member, but personally, I'd just
>> give you commit rights to make this simpler. Any PMC member want to
>> propose Bob as committer?
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 4:25 AM, Bob Harner <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Well, I did create http://tapestry.apache.org/search.html a few months
>>> back, and it works much better than the general Google search. We
>>> still need to figure out how to integrate it or something like it into
>>> the site. That involves working with the template that I don't have
>>> write-access to.
>>>
>>> Anyway, most people will still tend to use the standard Google search.
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Agree, I'll help. I think one decent solution is a Google Custom
>>>> Search. There was a previous effort underway, but I don't know what
>>>> happened to it. If we could just properly search our own
>>>> documentation, that would already be a huge improvement.
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Bob Harner <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Most of the time when I use Google to search for Tapestry topics, the
>>>>> results are truly bad, because they are obscured by outdated
>>>>> documentation for Tapestry 4 and older versions of Tapestry 5. This
>>>>> makes Tapestry documentation seem much worse than it really is. (I
>>>>> happen to think the newer stuff is pretty good.)
>>>>>
>>>>> The root problem is that Tapestry's long history of documentation
>>>>> versions makes it hard for Google to tell which version is the best.
>>>>> For example, searching for "tapestry component parameters" (without
>>>>> quotes) results in:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/guide/parameters.html
>>>>> 2) http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4/UsersGuide/components.html
>>>>> 3) http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5.1/guide/coercion.html
>>>>> 4) http://tapestry.formos.com/nightly/tapestry5/tapestry-component-report/
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and hundreds of other links that are relevant but sub-optimal.
>>>>>
>>>>> The true best page  is really
>>>>> http://tapestry.apache.org/component-parameters.html -- but I couldn't
>>>>> find that page in any of the top 200 results.  And other search terms
>>>>> are similarly disappointing.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the solution? I propose doing the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Bulk edit or republish old 3.x and 4.x documentation pages to add a
>>>>> prominent banner added at the top pointing to the corresponding page
>>>>> in the newest documentation. The old content would remain in the
>>>>> pages.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Bulk edit or republish old 5.x documentation with all text REMOVED
>>>>> and a prominent banner added at the top pointing to the corresponding
>>>>> page in the newest documentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Finding a way to tell Google what older pages are "archived" and
>>>>> "low priority" and what new ones are "high priority". I guess a
>>>>> Sitemap 
>>>>> (http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=183668)
>>>>> can do that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm willing to work on these, though ultimately I'll need a
>>>>> committer's assistance for #1 and #2.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you all think? Any other ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>
> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>
> (971) 678-5210
> http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to