[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 09:35:55PM +0100, Guylhem Aznar wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 08:04:55PM +0100, Hugo.van.der.Kooij@caiw.nl wrote:
> > > LDP/<category>/<format>
> > >
> > > where <category> is HOWTO or FAQ or GUIDE
> > > and <format> is dvi or html-tgz or html or txt or docbook or
> > > Linuxdoc or pdf or ps or anything else that is useful and possible.
> We can do this (*)
Since most people who download docs from the LDP site probably do so
using http, why does it make much difference how we organize our
directory tree structure? This structure is not used for navigation
by http users. They go to our site (or a mirror) and then select the
<category>/<format> from links in the file /LDP/doc.html. They don't
concern themselves at all with the urls of the files they download.
One can also access LDP files (at metalab) by FTP and then do need to
navigate the directory structure. But I suspect few people do this as
none of the mirror sites are FTP sites. When they use these sites
they get connected to the main LDP site by http. Also, links in the
docs seem to point to http://. In fact, reorganizing the current
directory structure would break a lot of links.
So I suggest that we keep the existing structure for the time being
since it's not bad the way it is (and this structure is hidden from
most users anyway).
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org