Talk:Players Guide Chapter 1: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
--[[User:Fellice|Fellice]] 09:59, 24 September 2006 (EDT) | --[[User:Fellice|Fellice]] 09:59, 24 September 2006 (EDT) | ||
Basically a good idea. But, imagine the following (theoretically, I didn't check whether this can happen with the current contents): | |||
1. General | |||
Do command A...<br> | |||
Do command C...<br> | |||
Do command E...<br> | |||
1.1 '''W'''in | |||
Do command B-'''W'''...<br> | |||
Do command D-'''W'''...<br> | |||
1.2 '''M'''ac | |||
Do command B-'''M'''...<br> | |||
Do command D-'''M'''...<br> | |||
1.2 '''U'''nix | |||
Do command B-'''U'''...<br> | |||
Do command D-'''U'''...<br> | |||
--> Not very straightforward, compared to the actual activity. | |||
An option: | |||
1. General | |||
Do command A...<br> | |||
<links to B-W, B-M, B-U><br> | |||
Do command C...<br> | |||
<links to D-W, D-M, D-U><br> | |||
Do command E...<br> | |||
1.1 '''W'''in | |||
<link to A><br> | |||
Do command B-'''W'''...<br> | |||
<link to C><br> | |||
Do command D-'''W'''...<br> | |||
<link to E><br> | |||
...and so on... | |||
--> Still not straightforward, but with quicker jumping at least. | |||
However, both could be too sophisticated for the "normal" user. Maybe even worse if not all OSs need the same type of commands. | |||
--[[User:Geri|Geri]] 14:51, 28 September 2006 (EDT) |
Revision as of 18:51, 28 September 2006
There is a lot of redundant text in this page. Each subheading for the different operating systems had almost identical text, with only a slight variation (commands to use). Does anyone agree that it would be clearer if each sub-heading was re-written to be a general account, and only the OS variances separated out in a sub-sub-heading?
--jonmack
Probably a good idea.
Maybe you should edit the section on a different page, change it along your ideas and then we all have a look at it and compare with the old layout. If the new layout is generally accepted we can either reditect or copy the content over the old page and delete the work-page again.
--Fellice 09:59, 24 September 2006 (EDT)
Basically a good idea. But, imagine the following (theoretically, I didn't check whether this can happen with the current contents):
1. General
Do command A...
Do command C...
Do command E...
1.1 Win
Do command B-W...
Do command D-W...
1.2 Mac
Do command B-M...
Do command D-M...
1.2 Unix
Do command B-U...
Do command D-U...
--> Not very straightforward, compared to the actual activity.
An option:
1. General
Do command A...
<links to B-W, B-M, B-U>
Do command C...
<links to D-W, D-M, D-U>
Do command E...
1.1 Win
<link to A>
Do command B-W...
<link to C>
Do command D-W...
<link to E>
...and so on...
--> Still not straightforward, but with quicker jumping at least.
However, both could be too sophisticated for the "normal" user. Maybe even worse if not all OSs need the same type of commands.
--Geri 14:51, 28 September 2006 (EDT)