Difference between revisions of "Category talk:LSL Flow Control"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:::Aesthetics and ease-of-use/maintainability. | :::Aesthetics and ease-of-use/maintainability. | ||
:::#I was considering making a Meta-Category for LSL. Wanted to get a better handle on the categories before I did so though. Not keen on moving content and renaming category pages (you can't move category pages; you have to edit them). Categorizing everything and writing category pages was my next project. | :::#I was considering making a Meta-Category for LSL. Wanted to get a better handle on the categories before I did so though. Not keen on moving content and renaming category pages (you can't move category pages; you have to edit them). Categorizing everything and writing category pages was my next project. After that constants. | ||
:::#It plays into building a meta-category. See below. | :::#It plays into building a meta-category. See below. | ||
:::#Yes and no. How would you go about building it? Without the LSL prefix, how would you know which categories to add without going through them all. And if a new LSL specific category were created, would you be able to easily tell by looking at the category list? Having LSL as a prefix is a maintainable solution. | :::#Yes and no. How would you go about building it? Without the LSL prefix, how would you know which categories to add without going through them all. And if a new LSL specific category were created, would you be able to easily tell by looking at the category list? Having LSL as a prefix is a maintainable solution. | ||
:::It makes editing easier and it's no uglier then having "Category:" before it. What's the harm in a little more prefix? | :::It makes editing easier and it's no uglier then having "Category:" before it. What's the harm in a little more prefix? | ||
:::[[User:Strife Onizuka|Strife Onizuka]] 16:49, 23 February 2007 (PST) | :::[[User:Strife Onizuka|Strife Onizuka]] 16:49, 23 February 2007 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 16:51, 23 February 2007
LSL Prefix
Question: Does this category need the LSL prefix. SignpostMarv Martin 09:47, 23 February 2007 (PST)
- Turns the question around: Why doesn't this category need the LSL prefix.
- It comes down to aesthetics. There aren't any technical reasons. When looking at the category list it makes it easy to find LSL categories. Searching for LSL categories is difficult. It makes enumeration easier. Strife Onizuka 10:01, 23 February 2007 (PST)
- LSL-specific categories should be listed under Category:LSL
- Enumeration ?
- If LSL-specific categories were listed under Category:LSL, and you were looking for LSL stuff you'd go there first- would the LSL prefix need to be there ?
- SignpostMarv Martin 14:30, 23 February 2007 (PST)
- Aesthetics and ease-of-use/maintainability.
- I was considering making a Meta-Category for LSL. Wanted to get a better handle on the categories before I did so though. Not keen on moving content and renaming category pages (you can't move category pages; you have to edit them). Categorizing everything and writing category pages was my next project. After that constants.
- It plays into building a meta-category. See below.
- Yes and no. How would you go about building it? Without the LSL prefix, how would you know which categories to add without going through them all. And if a new LSL specific category were created, would you be able to easily tell by looking at the category list? Having LSL as a prefix is a maintainable solution.
- It makes editing easier and it's no uglier then having "Category:" before it. What's the harm in a little more prefix?
- Strife Onizuka 16:49, 23 February 2007 (PST)
- Aesthetics and ease-of-use/maintainability.