Re: Uniform set of categories for all sections that have them?


Do you know where your variables are?
	PerlMonks

Re: Uniform set of categories for all sections that have them?

by rinceWind (Monsignor)

on Mar 20, 2006 at 16:34 UTC ( [id://537984]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Uniform set of categories for all sections that have them?

I think I get what you mean. A simple hyperlink could be generated between identically named categories.

For example, CGI Programming would contain a link Categorised Q&A, and the page QandASection: CGI programming would contain a link Code Catacombs, displayed fairly promenantly.

Tutorials would need integrating in a similar fashion, because the section doesn't currently have a node for each category.

--

Oh Lord, won’t you burn me a Knoppix CD ?
My friends all rate Windows, I must disagree.
Your powers of persuasion will set them all free,
So oh Lord, won’t you burn me a Knoppix CD ?
(Missquoting Janis Joplin)

Comment on Re: Uniform set of categories for all sections that have them?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Uniform set of categories for all sections that have them?
by jdporter (Paladin) on Mar 20, 2006 at 17:18 UTC

Tutorials would need integrating in a similar fashion, because the section doesn't currently have a node for each category.

Well, yes, actually it does. (See my example in the root node.) Modern Tutorials is a nested structure, i.e. a tree.

It's rather unfortunate that the sections are implemented so differently, and appear so differently to the user. One possible side-effect of this proposed approach is that people might become increasingly aware of the difference in look-and-feel between the sections.

We're building the house of the future together.

[reply]

In Section Inner Scriptorium