-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Currently the page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Wiki_Structure#Page_naming has two different naming conventions, one for end-user docs, and one for non-end-user docs. The above says that single level nesting is ok for non-end-user sub-projects. ie, we could have /Ambassadors/Requirements_for_NA_Ambassadors (old style would have been /Ambassadors/NA/Requirements). And that end user docs is more akin to the RFC suggested style. The RFC iirc, says that page naming should be more akin to "A__Docs_Project_page_named_something_better" and abandon the /DocsProject/Pages/Better/Named/Because/Nested/A model. I saw a couple of messages as follow up (that focused on a specific page) but no real discussion of the merit of the RFC or lack thereof of page naming in general. Anyone care to wade into this discussion or will the RFC be implemented by fiat? I am purposefully trying to stir the pot a bit, as I recently asked for clarification and was told that there currently isn't a standard set - and that low list activity == poor decision making? :) Thoughts, Flames, Comments? David Nalley -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://getfiregpg.org iEYEARECAAYFAkibL0kACgkQkZOYj+cNI1epWwCffYn7HLtlAn/RMCfDMPmA6v7N yVYAn3sdlCBeihfJK/4t6Vfej673IxEj =0K7Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
