Proposed MDC category and topic page changes
Deb Richardson
convinced that Nickolay and Neil (and anyone else who argued with me
about this in the past) are correct: the "page type" categories are
not useful, and are actually causing more findability/discoverability
problems than they're solving. This being the case, I'd like to fix
things with the proposed changes as follow:
Category Changes
The basic concept behind the Category changes is to get rid of the
"type" categories entirely (Articles, References, Tools, etc), and
replace those with a single, simple top-level category and/or a
relevant sub-category where appropriate.
Examples of proposed changes:
* "Creating Custom Firefox Extensions" would move from
"Category:Extensions:Articles" to simply "Category:Extensions"
* "Core JavaScript 1.5 Reference:Global Objects:Number" would be put
in "Category:JavaScript Reference"
* "CSS3 Columns" would be removed from "Category:CSS:Articles" and
put instead into "Category:CSS" and "Category:CSS3"
If you think these sorts of changes are bad/incorrect/unwise please
speak now so we can talk any potential problems through before we
start making changes.
As it stands, there are approximately 1700 pages (and 275 categories)
that will need to be checked and modified. This is going to take, at
my current (and fuzzy) estimation, about a week to a week and a half
to do. I would like to do these changes sooner rather than later,
however, since revamping the Topic pages relies on these categories
being cleaned up first.
Topic Page Changes
See http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions for the
working version of the new Topic page format (with Discussion groups
added, category lists removed, "Selected Articles" and "Featured
Content" merged into a single "Documentation" list, etc). If you
have any suggestions about how that new format could be further
improved, please let me know.
Thanks. Unless major problems or debates spring up, I hope to start
the category changes next week. If you are interested in helping,
let me know.
~ deb
Andreas Wuest
On 3/3/06, Deb Richardson <d...@dria.org> wrote:
[ snip ]
> Topic Page Changes
>
> See http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions for the
> working version of the new Topic page format (with Discussion groups
> added, category lists removed, "Selected Articles" and "Featured
> Content" merged into a single "Documentation" list, etc). If you
> have any suggestions about how that new format could be further
> improved, please let me know.
I'd prefer to have "MDC Webwatch" at the bottom instead of "Related
Topics", since "MDC Webwatch" does not always have a corresponding
category (cf. e.g. http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/PyXPCOM,
etc.), and will therefore never have any content.
Either that, or we remove "MDC Webwatch" completely if there is no
corresponding category.
--
Kind regards,
Andi
Nickolay Ponomarev
> that will need to be checked and modified. This is going to take, at
> my current (and fuzzy) estimation, about a week to a week and a half
> to do. I would like to do these changes sooner rather than later,
> however, since revamping the Topic pages relies on these categories
> being cleaned up first.
>
Category:Extensions replace, can be automated.
One thing that bothers me is that there will be lots of obsolete
categories because of this reorg. We can't just delete those
categories, as people link to them from outside of MDC, and mediawiki
didn't support redirects from/to categories last time I checked.
> Topic Page Changes
>
> See http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions for the
> working version of the new Topic page format (with Discussion groups
> added, category lists removed, "Selected Articles" and "Featured
> Content" merged into a single "Documentation" list, etc). If you
> have any suggestions about how that new format could be further
> improved, please let me know.
>
The new layout is nice, but there are several problems with it:
1) there's no obvious link to Category:Extensions page (the link at
the bottom of the page is not as discoverable as in-page links).
2) the mozillazine extensions forum is missing from the list of
discussion forums, and so is the link to Extensions:Community (are we
ditching that page too?). This issue brings us to the next one:
3) the layout implies that discussion forums == mozilla.dev.*
newsgroups/mailing lists/whatever, by listing other discussion forums
(irc, mozillazine) under a separate section.
Nickolay
Deb Richardson
> Topics", since "MDC Webwatch" does not always have a corresponding
> category (cf. e.g. http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/PyXPCOM,
> etc.), and will therefore never have any content.
>
> Either that, or we remove "MDC Webwatch" completely if there is no
> corresponding category.
Ok, these both make sense -- we'll move Webwatch to the bottom if
there's a corresponding category, otherwise we'll remove it completely.
~ deb
Deb Richardson
> categories because of this reorg. We can't just delete those
> categories, as people link to them from outside of MDC, and mediawiki
> didn't support redirects from/to categories last time I checked.
My idea was to do redirects, which seem to work ok:
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/index.php?title=Category:Sandbox
> The new layout is nice, but there are several problems with it:
> 1) there's no obvious link to Category:Extensions page (the link at
> the bottom of the page is not as discoverable as in-page links).
Well, in addition to the link at the bottom of the page, the Category
link is in the yellow "Related" box in the right-hand column, as here:
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions
We could also put relevant category links in the "Related Topics"
section, or somesuch?
> 2) the mozillazine extensions forum is missing from the list of
> discussion forums, and so is the link to Extensions:Community (are we
> ditching that page too?).
> This issue brings us to the next one:
> 3) the layout implies that discussion forums == mozilla.dev.*
> newsgroups/mailing lists/whatever, by listing other discussion forums
> (irc, mozillazine) under a separate section.
Instead of having a separate "Community" page, we could merge those
links "View discussion as..." and "IRC channels" and just have a
"Community" section on the Topic page.
Would that be sufficient? I do want to promote the mozilla.dev.*
groups, but I would also like to promote other community links as
well, so this might be a better idea.
~ deb
Deb Richardson
> http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/index.php?title=Category:Sandbox
Hm. I just noticed that this adds the "Sandbox" category as a
subcategory of the XUL category (which is where it redirects to).
That's a little odd and remotely annoying.
~ deb
Deb Richardson
That will teach me to post before attempting a fix -- I managed to
make it work without having Sandbox as a subcat.
~ deb
Nickolay Ponomarev
> > categories because of this reorg. We can't just delete those
> > categories, as people link to them from outside of MDC, and mediawiki
> > didn't support redirects from/to categories last time I checked.
>
>
> > The new layout is nice, but there are several problems with it:
> > 1) there's no obvious link to Category:Extensions page (the link at
> > the bottom of the page is not as discoverable as in-page links).
>
> Well, in addition to the link at the bottom of the page, the Category
> link is in the yellow "Related" box in the right-hand column, as here:
>
> http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions
>
> We could also put relevant category links in the "Related Topics"
> section, or somesuch?
>
I personally tend to focus on the page's content, sometimes missing
the links on sidebar, bottom bar, etc. Maybe it's just me, but I would
put a "View all" type of link (similar to what we use currently) in
the Documentation column.
> > 2) the mozillazine extensions forum is missing from the list of
> > discussion forums, and so is the link to Extensions:Community (are we
> > ditching that page too?).
> > This issue brings us to the next one:
> > 3) the layout implies that discussion forums == mozilla.dev.*
> > newsgroups/mailing lists/whatever, by listing other discussion forums
> > (irc, mozillazine) under a separate section.
>
> Instead of having a separate "Community" page, we could merge those
> links "View discussion as..." and "IRC channels" and just have a
> "Community" section on the Topic page.
>
> Would that be sufficient? I do want to promote the mozilla.dev.*
> groups, but I would also like to promote other community links as
> well, so this might be a better idea.
>
Yes, that's what I've been thinking about. But now it's not obvious
that the mailing list link and the newgroup link point to different
views of the same forum (and the arguably useful google group link is
gone). Not a big deal though.
Perhaps for topics that have more than a few active forums (various
webdev topics) we should keep the community page and link there from
the topic page.
Nickolay
Nickolay Ponomarev
>
> See http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions for the
> working version of the new Topic page format (with Discussion groups
> added, category lists removed, "Selected Articles" and "Featured
> Content" merged into a single "Documentation" list, etc). If you
> have any suggestions about how that new format could be further
> improved, please let me know.
I believe I mentioned this before and was frowned upon, but anyways. I
think we don't have to make all the topic page have *exactly* the same
structure.
The reason is that the topics are different from each other, for
example primary content on JavaScript page is the Guide and the
Reference (plus a few articles describing the recent improvements in
JS1.6 and some concepts people have trouble understanding - like doing
OOP or closures and their effects).
The Extensions page, on the other hand, is quite different. There's no
reference or guide, but there are a few introductory tutorials, some
references on packaging and such, and a number of howto articles.
(Also note, that many of extension articles also apply to development
of Mozilla itself and xulrunner apps.)
I could continue, but the point is, the topics are different enough to
warrant some difference in the structure of the page. Specifically I'm
thinking of tweaking the left column depending on what kind of
information we have on a particular topic. Probably also making use of
optional sections, such as "Tools" (is it intentionally missing from
the Extensions topic page, by the way?)
Nickolay
Deb Richardson
> warrant some difference in the structure of the page. Specifically I'm
> thinking of tweaking the left column depending on what kind of
> information we have on a particular topic. Probably also making use of
> optional sections, such as "Tools" (is it intentionally missing from
> the Extensions topic page, by the way?)
I think that if someone qualified steps forward to act as an "owner"
for a particular topic page and he/she would like to change the page
from the default framework, that would be ok so long as the changes
are discussed and agreed upon first. If an owner doesn't step
forward to take responsibility for maintaining the page, then I would
like to stick closely to a default framework.
Until the existing topic pages have been modified to the new default
framework, I would like to keep them as they currently are. Once all
of the new modifications have been made, we can discuss pages on a
case-by-case basis.
~ deb
Deb Richardson
> the links on sidebar, bottom bar, etc. Maybe it's just me, but I would
> put a "View all" type of link (similar to what we use currently) in
> the Documentation column.
I've added this.
> Yes, that's what I've been thinking about. But now it's not obvious
> that the mailing list link and the newgroup link point to different
> views of the same forum (and the arguably useful google group link is
> gone). Not a big deal though.
I've switched this around a bit again, using the original "View
Forums as..." format for the mail/news stuff, then adding a link to
"Other community links..." below.
I've also added "Development Tools" to the related topics section.
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions
Let me know what you think. Thanks.
~ deb
Nickolay Ponomarev
> > Yes, that's what I've been thinking about. But now it's not obvious
> > that the mailing list link and the newgroup link point to different
> > views of the same forum (and the arguably useful google group link is
> > gone). Not a big deal though.
>
> I've switched this around a bit again, using the original "View
> Forums as..." format for the mail/news stuff, then adding a link to
> "Other community links..." below.
>
> I've also added "Development Tools" to the related topics section.
>
> http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions
>
> Let me know what you think. Thanks.
>
== Community ==
* View Mozilla Forums
** as mailing list
** as newsgroup
** as a google group
* #extdev
* mozillazine
* project_owners
?
I think that 2-3 links is not enough to warrant creating a separate page.
Also the "Development Tools" link doesn't really belong in the Related
Topics section, as it's semantically different from all the other
links there. Perhaps another subsection? (Although I fear a bit that
the topic pages may become overwhelming)
Nickolay
Deb Richardson
> * View Mozilla Forums
> ** as mailing list
> ** as newsgroup
> ** as a google group
> * #extdev
> * mozillazine
> * project_owners
Ok, I've tried this -- it's not bad. I could live with this.
> Also the "Development Tools" link doesn't really belong in the Related
> Topics section, as it's semantically different from all the other
> links there. Perhaps another subsection? (Although I fear a bit that
> the topic pages may become overwhelming)
Yeah I'm trying to keep it from getting too busy. I added a Tools
section and compensated by removing the Webwatch RSS feed...I'm not
sure how useful or interesting that feed is in this context, and it
does take up some valuable real-estate on those pages.
How's this look?
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions
~ deb
Nickolay Ponomarev
> > Topics section, as it's semantically different from all the other
> > links there. Perhaps another subsection? (Although I fear a bit that
> > the topic pages may become overwhelming)
>
> Yeah I'm trying to keep it from getting too busy. I added a Tools
> section and compensated by removing the Webwatch RSS feed...I'm not
> sure how useful or interesting that feed is in this context, and it
> does take up some valuable real-estate on those pages.
>
> How's this look?
>
> http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Sandbox:Extensions
>
useful and removing the link to Category:Extensions from Related
Topics section, I'm not sure why it was put there in first place.
Nickolay
Nickolay Ponomarev
> Looks great.
In the particular case of Extensions topic, I would like to have a
customized look as discussed below. I hope to tweak it after we get
the reorganization done.
Nickolay
Deb Richardson
> useful and removing the link to Category:Extensions from Related
> Topics section, I'm not sure why it was put there in first place.
Ok, cool. The tools you added aren't in the
Category:Extensions:Tools category, which is where the "View All..."
link goes. Should those tools be added to the category, or should we
be doing something else with the "View All..." link?
~ deb
Nickolay Ponomarev
Deb Richardson
Ok, this looks good.
If anyone else has thoughts about how the Topic pages or Categories
should be changed or improved from what has been discussed in this
thread, please speak up. Otherwise, we'll consider these plans
finalized on Wednesday morning and I'll post about it on my weblog,
and we should be able to get started on the changes Wednesday afternoon.
~ deb