Am Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2006 13:00 schrieb bulat.ziganshin@gmail.com:
[...]
for example, i think that all libraries should be under Library or Libraries root and so on. we started with filling up the pages, now we had enough contents to see what the structure will serve better
Be careful. A title is not a path name. I think, using hierarchy is good in cases like "GHC/Documentation" since the page is strictly about documentation *for GHC*. So it is clear what the ancestor page should be (GHC). The non-hierarchical title "GHC documentation" would contain the "GHC" anyway and the hierarchical title has more structure. But "Libraries/Edison" seems not like a good idea to me. The more structure you add, the higher is the probability that your structure will not fit future needs. If we want to minimize the reasons for page renamings in the future, we should tend to use "flat names", i.e., names with little or no hierarchical information. If we develop software, we also don't know the right design right from the start. (And therefore we need something better than CVS since CVS doesn't support moving of files and directories. ;-) ) Best wishes, Wolfgang