I've done something similar, but the directory names are not as descriptive
as Google's. Neither do they offer the functionality Google does where a
user can intelligently edit the URL to get to another stage (a user can do
it, but going to /SCL, from /SCL/SCLA is not as informative as Google's
structure is).
OTOH, I do provide a bread crumb trail where the user can jump to any
previous state they had visited.
The only template in each of my directories is a single index.cfm. The
actual templates are CFINCLUDEed from a CF-mapped directory the web server
cannot see. I guess this might slightly reduce the exposure a display of
directory structure offers....
So the short answer is I think the directory tree can be useful for users,
mine is exposed in a recent app, but it's not as useful to users as
Google's is.
best, paul
At 09:56 AM 4/14/01 -0700, you wrote:
>That was really informative Roger, thanks.
>The question I posed is still unanswered though. How do fuseboxers feel
>about hiding the directory tree from the users and could it provide some
>useful functionality?
>
> From the links Roger provided, I'm seeing that for cataloging large amounts
>of information the directory technique works wonderfully. But what about
>applications who have finite levels ( I've never made a site deeper than 3 )
>does the use of directories for navigation/interaction make sense?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
