Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Daniel Mayer maveric149@yahoo.com writes:
Easily accessible links is the whole point of HTML and the web.
No ;) I still believe contents is more important; all these links, esp. these navigation links are superfluous. A good search engine is all you need -- frankly, navigations links are a waste of resources (time and bandwidth). I admit, it nice to click around but going this way you usually will not find the info you are looking for.
I think you may be working on the wrong project, Karl. It sounds like you're looking for Gopherpedia. ;-)
Seriously, one of the reasons wikis work so well is the ease of linking and cross-referencing. Are you arguing that if a person is reading the article on Mexico, and then wants to read about the history of the country in more detail, he should have to do a search to find our History of Mexico article?
However, I would love to see our searching capabilities improved. That's not a complaint, dear developers, just a little wistful thinking. :)
Stephen G.
sgilbert@nbnet.nb.ca writes:
Seriously, one of the reasons wikis work so well is the ease of linking and cross-referencing. Are you arguing that if a person is reading the article on Mexico, and then wants to read about the history of the country in more detail, he should have to do a search to find our History of Mexico article?
This of course is perfectly okay: for more info see [[History of Mexico]]. But linking arbitrary [[term]]s is of dubious value.
However, I would love to see our searching capabilities improved. That's not a complaint, dear developers, just a little wistful thinking.
Yes, users and writers have the right to list missing features; if developers cannot stand it they should feel free to take a break.
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org