Template talk:GVCS List: Difference between revisions
Marie.Byleen (talk | contribs) (Created page with "~~~~ If this remains an element of the draft I'm working on, the elements needs to be categorized/organized somehow. What do you imagine would be intuitive to people?") |
Marie.Byleen (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[User:Marie.Byleen|Marie.Byleen]] 09:12, 7 February 2011 (PST) | [[User:Marie.Byleen|Marie.Byleen]] 09:12, 7 February 2011 (PST) | ||
If this remains an element of the draft I'm working on, the elements needs to be categorized/organized somehow. What do you imagine would be intuitive to people? | If this remains an element of the draft I'm working on, the elements needs to be categorized/organized somehow. What do you imagine would be intuitive to people? | ||
[[User:Marie.Byleen|Marie.Byleen]] 09:30, 25 February 2011 (PST) This doesn't look so great as of right now. I think there may be a more beautiful/balanced way to integrate this kind of (potentially) collapsing table strategy into the main page... I still hold the opinion that alphabetical order is most appropriate here, as long as the categories in the header keep on their trend of becoming more reflective of the content as categorization is getting better. I've changed my mind on this significantly since I wrote the above comment. Having quick access to elements at lower levels of the organizational structure without having to remember the categories to which they belong saves time. It also has the potential to bring attention to elements of the project that people focused on one area/category might overlook. | |||
Revision as of 17:30, 25 February 2011
Marie.Byleen 09:12, 7 February 2011 (PST) If this remains an element of the draft I'm working on, the elements needs to be categorized/organized somehow. What do you imagine would be intuitive to people?
Marie.Byleen 09:30, 25 February 2011 (PST) This doesn't look so great as of right now. I think there may be a more beautiful/balanced way to integrate this kind of (potentially) collapsing table strategy into the main page... I still hold the opinion that alphabetical order is most appropriate here, as long as the categories in the header keep on their trend of becoming more reflective of the content as categorization is getting better. I've changed my mind on this significantly since I wrote the above comment. Having quick access to elements at lower levels of the organizational structure without having to remember the categories to which they belong saves time. It also has the potential to bring attention to elements of the project that people focused on one area/category might overlook.