Difference between revisions of "Category talk:LSL Library"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Gigs Taggart (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
::::[[User:SignpostMarv Martin|SignpostMarv Martin]] 11:15, 13 February 2007 (PST) | ::::[[User:SignpostMarv Martin|SignpostMarv Martin]] 11:15, 13 February 2007 (PST) | ||
::::: The wiki search does NOT search the USER namespace by default. It only searches the main namespace. This was one of the arguements used as to why an LSL: namespaces could not and should not be used. [[User:Thraxis Epsilon|Thraxis Epsilon]] 11:27, 13 February 2007 (PST) | ::::: The wiki search does NOT search the USER namespace by default. It only searches the main namespace. This was one of the arguements used as to why an LSL: namespaces could not and should not be used. [[User:Thraxis Epsilon|Thraxis Epsilon]] 11:27, 13 February 2007 (PST) | ||
Library scripts aren't necessarily just one person's. They benefit from the wiki process of collaborative editing just like everything else. Putting them in the user namespace would discourage contributions. I'm strongly against the library articles being in any namespace other than default. They should not use a pseudo-namespace either. The category links are enough. [[User:Gigs Taggart|Gigs Taggart]] 12:01, 13 February 2007 (PST) | |||
Revision as of 12:01, 13 February 2007
re: Rules for posting
Enforcing the "LSL Library" prefix "in order to keep the namespace clean" is kinda contradictory.
Keeping the articles in the creator's own user-space makes a whole lot more sense- see Resident's own pages in Resident's own user-spaces
SignpostMarv Martin 14:48, 12 February 2007 (PST)
- Doing that will remove those items from the search. I do not see that as an advantage. Thraxis Epsilon 15:45, 12 February 2007 (PST)
- No it wouldn't.
- Wiki search for llXorBase64StringsCorrect()
- Google Co-op search for llXorBase64StringsCorrect()
- Also:
- All the LSL Library scripts would be listed here.
- All the LSL Library scripts should be cross linked to other relevant sub categories.
- SignpostMarv Martin 07:00, 13 February 2007 (PST)
- I am loath to put library scripts into categories with built in functions. Since we are considering a pseudo-namespace specific to LSL (ie, LSL:) why not LSL Library: be considered? I seem to be less loath to having it included library scripts in categories with functions as a pseudo-namespace with a ":" then a " ". ":" provides a better separator. Strife Onizuka 08:30, 13 February 2007 (PST)
- You don't seem to have read WEB-22. We won't be using namespaces for LSL.
- Category structure demo:
- Category:LSL Functions
- subcats: Category:LSL Library, Category:Math, Category:Time, Category:Physics etc
- List of ll* functions
- Category:Math
- subcats: Category:LSL Library/Math
- List of LSL math functions
- [[Category:LSL Functions]]
- Category:LSL Library
- subcats: Category:LSL Library/Math, Category:LSL Library/Time, Category:LSL Library/Physics etc.
- list of library scripts needing to be categorised further
- [[Category:LSL Functions| ]] (to have the library listed at the top of the sub cat list)
- Category:LSL Library/Math
- list of LSL math library functions
- [[Category:Math| ]] [[Category:LSL Library|Math]]
- Category:LSL Functions
- SignpostMarv Martin 11:15, 13 February 2007 (PST)
- The wiki search does NOT search the USER namespace by default. It only searches the main namespace. This was one of the arguements used as to why an LSL: namespaces could not and should not be used. Thraxis Epsilon 11:27, 13 February 2007 (PST)
- I am loath to put library scripts into categories with built in functions. Since we are considering a pseudo-namespace specific to LSL (ie, LSL:) why not LSL Library: be considered? I seem to be less loath to having it included library scripts in categories with functions as a pseudo-namespace with a ":" then a " ". ":" provides a better separator. Strife Onizuka 08:30, 13 February 2007 (PST)
Library scripts aren't necessarily just one person's. They benefit from the wiki process of collaborative editing just like everything else. Putting them in the user namespace would discourage contributions. I'm strongly against the library articles being in any namespace other than default. They should not use a pseudo-namespace either. The category links are enough. Gigs Taggart 12:01, 13 February 2007 (PST)