History and library articles in the wrong places.

4 posts / 0 new
Login or register to post comments
Last post
#1
Top
Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 7 2008 12:58
History and library articles in the wrong places.

History and library articles in the wrong places.

OK so we decided a short while ago not to make history and library articles identical (yet), but to put everything about actual events into history. I did some sql to change this automatically, but some stuff slipped through, and I think we've put things in library recently that should've gone in history as well. sad

One way to find them is to use the section tags pages for common terms that should only appear in one:

http://libcom.org/library/tags/strikes
http://libcom.org/history/tags/strikes
(which is what prompted this thread).

Just noting this here so I don't forget, and so we can think of how to deal with this.

I think it'd be better if new library articles had the url "/theory/blah-blah" instead of library - and if we eventually change 'thought' to 'theory'. Then when library becomes the catalogue/directory/guide-to-everything, and thought deals with portals to different writers and movements, it won't be so confusing. Old urls I'm not bothered by at the moment, although we can set something up to auto-redirect from old urls to new ones if we want. Probably worth it.

Also - I made some views at libcom.org/articles which pull in library history and image galleries together (some might not include image galleries yet) - so basically they just exclude news (and news has news/tags/tag + we have tags/tag for everything).

I think it'd be nice, eventually, to have articles/tags/tag news/tags/tag and tags/tag - and nothing else. But, do we have any tags where we'd want to separate history and library articles from each other? I can't think of any at the moment.

#2
Top
Mark.
Offline
Joined: 11-02-07
Jan 7 2008 15:46

Not criticising - just curious. The Italian base unions article has been put in history and the Coordinadora article in the library - was there any particular reason for this?

#3
Top
Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 7 2008 15:48

No JH, that's part of the problem sad

#4
Top
Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 17 2008 10:31
Quote:
I think it'd be better if new library articles had the url "/theory/blah-blah" instead of library - and if we eventually change 'thought' to 'theory'. Then when library becomes the catalogue/directory/guide-to-everything, and thought deals with portals to different writers and movements, it won't be so confusing. Old urls I'm not bothered by at the moment, although we can set something up to auto-redirect from old urls to new ones if we want. Probably worth it.

OK John persuaded me this is a shit idea. An alternative would be to give all theory and history the url library/blah-blah - but keep the content types separate. This would make it much easier to switch stuff between the two when they're in the wrong place for whatever reason, which is the main problem at the moment.

What we could do then, is move the 'thought' content type into 'library' - merge them completely - since it's all intros or short theoretical articles anyway, which are also organised in books on the index - we don't need that to be separate. Organise we could probably do the same thing - again, it's all organised in books and we don't use the 'type' at all for anything useful.

We could then have 'history' and 'theory' for article submissions - both of which end up in the library, but 1. tell people what they're actually submitting 2. keep the separation for admin/technical reasons. I know fiction and some other stuff doesn't fit into those, but better to mess that up than have dozens of mis-placed articles all the time.

Quote:
Also - I made some views at libcom.org/articles which pull in library history and image galleries together (some might not include image galleries yet) - so basically they just exclude news (and news has news/tags/tag + we have tags/tag for everything).

This was also a shit idea, so I killed it.