Re: [security-services] The wiki is live

[Paul Madsen <paulmadsen@rogers.com>]

agree that we should spend some time thinking about a structure before 
we start

For this piece, I see a link structure something like

- Wiki home (with link to Post 2.0 docs)
    - "Post 2.0 docs"  (links to individual doc pages sorted into 
sections reflecting status)
       - Individual doc page (text from abstract as description, links 
to PDF etc)

make sense?

paul
Tom Scavo wrote:
> I like the idea of section titles for each document stage.  This would
> allow for a brief explanation of each stage of the process (or an
> external link, if applicable).  However, rather than link to
> *documents* in each section, link to *pages*, one for each document
> stream.  (I'm assuming of course that this wiki setup allows for
> multiple pages.)
>
> Popping up a level, this "Documents" page would be a second-level
> page, linked to from the top-level wiki page, which would have links
> to other second-level pages of interest.  Not sure what the overall
> information structure needs to look like, though.
>
> Tom
>
> On 4/17/07, SCOTT CANTOR <cantor.2@osu.edu> wrote:
>> > I personally liked a table (and was planning on changing the axes)
>> > because it made clear what set of docs were at any one stage ...
>> > the cost is greater complexity for editing.
>>
>> Changing the axis would be fine by me.
>>
>> > How about section titles for each stage, docs get moved up (down?)
>> > as they progress?
>>
>> That would be fine also.
>>
>> -- Scott
>>
>>
>>
>
>

-- 
Paul Madsen             e:paulmadsen @ ntt-at.com
NTT                     p:613-482-0432
                        m:613-302-1428
                        aim:PaulMdsn5
                        web:connectid.blogspot.com