Page naming question - follow up to RFC

[Ian Weller]

On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 01:22:47PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> Currently the page
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Wiki_Structure#Page_naming has two
> different naming conventions, one for end-user docs, and one for
> non-end-user docs.
> 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
> model.
> 
> 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
check logs.

-- 
Ian Weller <ianweller at 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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20080807/7d4a5218/attachment.sig>