Susan Bugher said:
IMO Pricelessware program pages should *not* have links to these pages.
Haven't we had this discussion before . . .
In part, although that discussion was primarily in reference to 3rd
party reviews. Furthermore I thought it was left as to be decided
when we had relevant pages. BTW, does this mean you are also
suggesting that links to Buzzy's reviews also be removed?
I understood your original paragraph
"My personal preference is to list the Text Editor pages on
the INFO page ....
"The other options I see are to link the pages from the Links
page
or from the Members Sites page." - Susan Bugher
to be listing your preference and other options, but you left out the
best one (IMHO).
I disagree. IMO the pages will be most useful to ACF regulars - as an
aid in finding programs to meet their own needs and as an aid in finding
a suitable program to recommend in response to requests in ACF.
I don't really care either way; even if the primary users after the
first few months continue to be acf regulars, many visitors will not
be regulars. The more helpful we can make the entire site, the more
useful it will be to the community beyond acf regulars. The better
the information the more others are likely to link to the site. And
so on.
Linking from the subcategory to the expanded comparison would provide
a
clear(er) "link" to this information. Burying it in Info or Links
will mean that many (most?) visitors other than acf regulars will miss
it.
My experience watching and working with people browsing is that a
vague high level information link of this sort will not be followed if
highly relevant relevant information has already been found. (BTW,
this is also an argument for a search function.)
I know I visited the site many times without going to the Info and
Links pages. Even when I did, I probably just glanced at the
contents. When I came back to the site later, a few of the links
found there would have been useful, but were not with like kind
information (e.g., security links either on the security page or a
link to the security list links) and therefore were foregotten. ('Tis
true my memory is much the worse for wear, but still servicable --
except for names).
I'd be interested to hear other opinions on this.
I don't think any limits are being set. If other new pages are proposed
they will be decided upon in the newsgroup - just as we are doing now
with the text editor pages.
But as the first, it sets a precedent and therefore a future
presumption.
I'm not aware of any easy way to accomplish this. What do you know that
I don't.
The brute force approach would be two columns of cells, the left right
justified, the right left justified. The colon can go in either
column (or as still a third column) or be left out depending upon the
spacing and border lines (if any). Some editors also allow one to set
the decimalpoint symbol and align on it (I've forgotten the generic
name for a decimal point) even with non-numeric text.
AFAIK REMbranded is still deciding what to show where. The draft page I
created is just a starting point . . .
Always a good way to get feedback.
IMO the pages are complimentary. The comparision table is great but I
think it is also helpful to have an alphabetical list and separate
program descriptions to refer to.
As I said, "Unless we include...." And I agree: they are
complementary. For the web, I would prefer to see the spreadsheet with
column headers and 1 row, but that would not print very well.
Furthermore, if we add a number of new criteria, being able to scan
the entire result for a single product without scrolling would be
nice.
As always, thanks for soliciting input.
BillR
