directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <>
Subject RE: RE: [VOTE] Re: Re: Web site ready - give it a try
Date Wed, 07 Jul 2004 06:28:46 GMT
> > Well it is a bit of a silly thing to argue about.
> If we care about the names of things give us some leaway even if
> you believe it's silly.

Take as much leeway as you want.  But ideally a vote is more a celebration
of an emerged consensus; if you need to count votes, it can indicate
stresses in the community that should be looked at.  Besides, it isn't as if
a vote not to do something will mean anything if the consensus really
changes.  In this instance, there was clearly no consensus to change names,
so why make an issue of it?

> I'm getting ready to have another son within the next few weeks.
> I'm thinking about his name very carefully.  Is that silly?

Nope.  But when you go to his school, you're likely to ask for the
registrar's office, not the registrar by name.  And that's what Nicola Ken
is talking about.

> If we want to structure the site in a more navigable fashion that will
> be clearer I'm all for that.  And as you suggest this is your primary
> goal, not to change the name of these products.


And I'm not sure the best way to do it.  I think we're fine having the
subproject names across the top.  Despite what you said in another message,
it might be nice if we had a left-hand menu like:

  ASN.1 CODEC             -> page discussing the semantic space
    - Snickers            -> Snickers project page
  LDAP/Directory Server   -> what/why, and overview of why we have two
    - Eve                 -> Eve project page
    - LDAPd               -> LDAPd project page
  JNDI                    -> JNDI and also reference to Eve/LDAPd backends
    - naming              -> Our java:comp/env support
  Identity/Authorization  -> Overview
    - RMS                 -> Simplified model
    - JANUS               -> Engine capable of underlying IETF AAA

You said that it won't work, but I don't see why not.  And, yes, Jakarta and
XML use codename based navigation, but we also get comments from people who
say that they have trouble finding things.  There have been casual
discussions about ontological portals and other things to help make finding
what people want more easily, although I've yet to see anything concrete

I'm not saying the above structure is right or wrong.  The goal should be to
give people the ability to understand and find WHAT they are looking at, not
just see its name.  Until they know what a registrar does, it really doesn't
matter what his or her name is, does it?  And once they become as familar as
we want them to be, odds are they'll be on a first name basis.

	--- Noel

View raw message