Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Just another Perl shrine
 
PerlMonks  

Suggestion for post-naming convention

by kudra (Vicar)
on Jul 10, 2000 at 20:23 UTC ( #21814=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

ybiC seems to think I should post what I'm doing, and nobody else on chatterbox expressed strong disagreement.

I often have difficulty finding old nodes I would like to link to because of common or unrelated subjects (for example, a post about tie with a subject of Re: RE: RE: Suggestions quest).

In an attempt to address this problem, I am going through my old posts (which thankfully are small in number) and apending all Re: titles with (kudra: <subject>) (minus the emphasis). I think this could be useful because:

  1. Subject titles are now unique, which leads to easier linking (existing links are most likely unaffected, because links to replies are usually done by node_id). Titles are longer, but can always be pasted in.
  2. Nodes will respond better to searchs by answering to relevant keywords and by specifying the author in the event of multiple returns. A quick glance at the subject will reveal if the post is the one being sought
  3. The original title is retained, so it is easy to see which posts are related, even without being on one of the thread's nodes

For an example of this, look at my list of postings.

Comment on Suggestion for post-naming convention
Ozymandias: Re: Suggestion for post-naming convention
by Ozymandias (Hermit) on Jul 10, 2000 at 20:54 UTC
    Although this is a good idea, I think it'd be easier to use use node id's when linking to replies. It WOULD be nice if a square-bracket link could point to a node id, like this:
    [node:21820|This node]
    That'd be just as convenient for linking, and you wouldn't have to go back and change all your titles.

    - Ozymandias

    Update: kudra has made some updated suggestions on her home node, since root level nodes can't be edited (hint, hint).

    After discussing it a little more with kudra, I find I misunderstood her intent; She's not proposing we all go back and change titles on existing nodes, she's suggesting we should change node titles on replies. She has a good point with that; I agree completely. To prove it, I'm going to change the title of this reply. <G>

      You can point to a specific node in square brackets...
      [id://10195|Russ' Home Node]
      results in Russ' Home Node

      Russ

RE: Suggesion for post-naming convention (kudos)
by ybiC (Prior) on Jul 11, 2000 at 12:29 UTC
    "and nobody else on chatterbox expressed strong disagreement"
    kudra is too modest.

    Several Monks (including myself) on the Chatterbox this afternoon opined that her reply nomenclature is a great idea. It can't help but improve navigation through the ever-growing Monastery archives.

    Update: turns out kudra was joking and slow clumsy ybiC didn't pick up on it. :^P

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://21814]
Approved by root
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-09-20 00:49 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (151 votes), past polls