Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 29, 2020, at 3:40 AM, Marcus <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>
> Am 29.12.20 um 09:54 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2020 1:24 AM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?
>>>
>>>> On 22/12/2020 Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>>>>> my personal opinion is very simple:
>>>>> for me it would be enough to archive a static copy of the
>>> current state of the web pages, a history is not needed (in
>>> my opinion).
>>>
>>> This is what we get by using SVN/GIT (for static content,
>>> like the main
>>> OpenOffice.org site). And I believe this is enough to our
>>> preservation
>>> purposes.
>>>
>>> For mwiki we have templates and that is probably fine; but
>>> maybe we can
>>> find a way (with appropriate plugins) to inject "[OUTDATED]" into the
>>> HTML "title" tag of relevant pages, so that people who use search
>>> engines will not be misled into outdated pages.
>> How do we want to define "outdated pages"?
>
> in general, for me a page is outdated when there is a new one with updated
> content.
>
> If only parts are outdated, then the complete page cannot be outdated. Then
> we have to mark only the respective parts as outdated.
>
>> Many pages are seemingly(!) outdated, but in reality they are needed (e.g.
>> for the daily voluntary support on mailing lists or in forums).
>> Look e.g. at the extremely important pages with technical info for the
>> creation of extensions:
>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Extensions
>
> Maybe we should send pointers to these collections of pages to dev@ and judge
> case by case what to do.
>
>> These pages are outdated in parts, but still there is no more current
>> information.
>> We don't need a super solution, we just need a reliable(!) archive for
>> previous web and wiki pages, i.e. an archive of which we are sure that it
>> includes all previous content.
>> Of course, an 'intelligent' search engine tagging would be a nice-to-have,
>> but I wouldn't really want to spend time on that, especially since, as I
>> just described with an example, it's difficult to clearly tell which pages
>> are really outdated.
>> Much easier, and imho functionally sufficient, would be a footer on each
>> archive page informing that this is an archive page plus a link to the start
>> page (web and wiki) of the current pages.
>
> The footer is only visible when you scroll comletely down. But many pages are
> longer and the searched information is maybe not far away from the top. Then
> you don't notice that the content is outdated.
>
> I don't recomemnd to put it in the footer. Having it on top is more helpful.
>
I agree that messaging should be at the top.
What we can do is allow metadata inserted at the top of the source and then
modify templates to see this.
(1) append a message to the html title.
(2) provide a link to the updated page at the top of the content.
Regards,
Dave
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
