On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 01:22:47PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
Currently the page
different naming conventions, one for end-user docs, and one for
The above says that single level nesting is ok for non-end-user
sub-projects. ie, we could have
/Ambassadors/Requirements_for_NA_Ambassadors (old style would have
been /Ambassadors/NA/Requirements). And that end user docs is more
akin to the RFC suggested style. The RFC iirc, says that page naming
should be more akin to "A__Docs_Project_page_named_something_better"
and abandon the /DocsProject/Pages/Better/Named/Because/Nested/A
I saw a couple of messages as follow up (that focused on a specific
page) but no real discussion of the merit of the RFC or lack thereof
of page naming in general. Anyone care to wade into this discussion or
will the RFC be implemented by fiat?
I am purposefully trying to stir the pot a bit, as I recently asked
for clarification and was told that there currently isn't a standard
set - and that low list activity == poor decision making? :)
I believe the page needs updated, because I think we agreed on a hard
"no subpages" rule. I don't remember that well though, I'll have to go
Ian Weller <ianweller(a)gmail.com> http://ianweller.org
GnuPG fingerprint: E51E 0517 7A92 70A2 4226 B050 87ED 7C97 EFA8 4A36
"Technology is a word that describes something that doesn't work yet."
~ Douglas Adams