Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: webdev: August 2002:
[webdev] Re: postnuke contents

[webdev] Re: postnuke contents

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: <webdev@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [webdev] Re: postnuke contents
From: "Dale W Hodge" <dwh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 10:47:54 -0500
Reply-to: webdev@xxxxxxxxx

> -----Original Message-----
> From: webdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:webdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
> Of Tom Hull

> There seem to be two general mechanisms for adding contents (as well
> as a number of specialized ones):
>    1) Topic/story, a two-level hierarchy. Stories can be read through
>       News (if so directed), and allow comments (if so directed).

Currently, I have enabled comments everywhere that's possible and makes

>       We
>       can facilitate this by coming up with a list of Topics. Each
>       topic can have an icon. (I suggest that we at least standardize
>       the icon size, and the smaller the better.)

I've downloaded some icon packs, though I have yet to install them.  There
are general topic icon packs, and member icon packs , the latter of which
there's several hundred icons.

>    2) Sections/articles, another two-level hierarchy, presumably for
>       more permanent additions (no News notice), but also no support
>       for comments.

I've renamed 'Sections' to 'Library', as that's really what it is: a place
to put permanent documents. Just as you wouldn't go marking up a book in a
public library, I see no good reason to allow marking up documents in the

> I'd prefer to use Sections/Articles for long-term content, and use
> Topic/Story for transient notices,

I agree.

> but I think it's critical that
> people be able to add comments to articles.

I disagree.  Strongly.  The idea of commenting on everything, everywhere is
just a bad idea.  Unless there's a technical error, documents in the Library
should be able to stand on thier own. A definitive guide should be just
that, and not have endless comments attached.

> However, given the lack
> of comment support for articles, maybe we should initially just use
> the topic/story mechanism?

If you want discussions attached, then yes.

> There's also something called Reviews, which is a one-level anti-
> hierarchy, basically a note with some info fields (Product, URL) and
> a 1-5 star rating. I don't think there's anyway of consolidating
> reviews/ratings. It's hard to tell for sure, since the software
> doesn't let Admin actually post a review (although you can Preview
> one, like, forever). Looks pretty crummy.

Reviews are for things like book or sofware reviews. Clint has a large
number of books that have been donated to Aclug that need to be put into a
physical library and could be reviewed.

> FAQ and Web Links are more specialized. FAQ files questions under
> a two-level hierarchy, which isn't bad. Web Links looks like N-level,
> but is flattened out. These both have some value, but it looks like
> it's going to be hard to get them organized nicely (especially FAQ,
> which is tough to do under the best of circumstances).

The biggest problem with Web Links is that there's no way to have something
appear in more than one catagory.  And the FAQ system is more of a help desk
system, where someone posts a question, and management provides an answer.
I've yet to find a mechanism for user feedback to a question.

Now that we've identified some problem areas, we need to do some sleuthing
to see if these are being addressed by the PostNuke team, or if we need to
do some custom modules.


Dale W Hodge - dwh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Vice Chairman & Secretary - info@xxxxxxxxx
Air Capital Linux User's Group  (ACLUG)

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]