forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clay Leeds <cle...@medata.com>
Subject Re: [RFP] automatically generate sitemap
Date Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:18:42 GMT

On Aug 9, 2004, at 8:16 PM, Dave Brondsema wrote:
> Clay Leeds wrote:
>> [Mildly-OT] It's a shame it can't be called some form of "Site Map" 
>> since that's what 99% of the internet calls the link on their web 
>> site (if they have one) where one can easily get to most--if not 
>> all--of their pages. Calling it anything but one of the following 
>> would probably only confuse newbies even more:
>> - sitemap.html
>> - site-map.html
>> - site%20map.html
>> - etc.
>> Although they contain the entire site, even site.html/site.pdf may 
>> not be the best choice because of this (of course I don't have a 
>> 'solution'--sorry!).
>> BTW, I do like the idea of a generated sitemap... but what to call it?
>
> What about navigation or site-structure?
>
> Or make it site?  And make the current site be wholesite.  I like 
> this, but it'd have to get into 0.6... it'd be too big of a 
> compatibility change to do later.

These are all good alternatives, but are not the de facto standard. 
When it comes to describing a page that has all the links to a site, I 
don't think anything I can think of has the same ring as "site map".

Then again, forrest's primary raison d'etre is for documentation, so 
perhaps "doc map" might do until we come up with something better.

"Site" is pretty close. And I was thinking about "wholesite" as an 
alternative to the current site.html/site.pdf as it's more descriptive. 
In fact, I think it would be better to have [project]-site.html/.pdf or 
[project]-wholesite.html/.pdf, so people will know what it is when 2 
months after they've DL'ed it.

> Either way... configurable names of these "special pages" should get 
> into future versions of forrest.

That is a nice goal for 0.7 or 0.8 :-)

Web Maestro Clay


Mime
View raw message