Difference between revisions of "Talk:Portal:Extensions directory"

From COLLADA Public Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(switching talk & article formats)
(move alternative format to separate page so it's clearer.)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Alternative format to what's currently in the article==
 
==Alternative format to what's currently in the article==
===Alternative strategy and instructions===
 
  
----
+
#Look at [[Extension directory/temp]].
{| style="text-align:left; width:100%; border:1px solid #666666;" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8"
+
#Compare with the format of what's currently in the article.
|-
+
#Read "Comparisons", below, and add additional notes if desired.
| style="background-color:#eeeeee;" | <big>'''Instructions for adding to this list'''</big>
+
#Vote and comment on which you prefer.
# Add a link for your company in the "Extensions by company" list (below). Format it as "''companyname productname'' extensions"; for example:
 
#:  [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
# Add the link also in the "Profile names" section by the name specified in <technique profile="''yourprofilename''">; for example:
 
#: XSI; see [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
# Add the link also under each relevant element in "Extensions by COLLADA element".
 
# Save this article.
 
# Click one of your new links to create your article. Tips:
 
#*Use [[Softimage XSI extensions]] as a model.
 
#*Put <nowiki>[[Category:Extensions]]</nowiki> at the end of the article.
 
|}
 
  
====Extensions by company====
+
Thanks. [[User:Elf|Elf]] 19:00, 12 May 2007 (PDT)
*[[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
*(add similar items in alpha order)
 
 
 
====Extensions by profile name====
 
*XSI; see [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
 
 
====Extensions by COLLADA element====
 
* <camera>
 
** [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
* <COLLADA>
 
** [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
* <image>
 
** [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
* <light>
 
** [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
* <node>
 
** [[Softimage XSI extensions]]
 
----
 
  
 
===Comparisons===
 
===Comparisons===
Format shown above:
+
Format mentioned above:
 
* Pro: If there are a lot of companies registering extensions, will make it easier to find extensions by each of the different categories.
 
* Pro: If there are a lot of companies registering extensions, will make it easier to find extensions by each of the different categories.
 
* Con: Same link appears in multiple places, so takes longer to insert a new one and harder to maintain.
 
* Con: Same link appears in multiple places, so takes longer to insert a new one and harder to maintain.
  
Current article format:
+
Current article format (single table):
* Pro: Link in only one place, so faster and easier to insert new one and to maintain list
+
* Pro: Link in only one place, so faster and easier to insert new one and to maintain list.
 +
* Pro: Easier to read.
 
* Con: Table is arranged only by company name, so if there are a lot of companies with extensions, it's harder to view the list of profile names and of extensions by element.
 
* Con: Table is arranged only by company name, so if there are a lot of companies with extensions, it's harder to view the list of profile names and of extensions by element.
  
Line 49: Line 21:
  
 
Which do you prefer, and why??
 
Which do you prefer, and why??
*Current article format (3 separate sections)
+
*Current article format (single table)
 +
**Easier to read. Simpler to add to. [[User:Elf|Elf]] 19:27, 12 May 2007 (PDT)
 
**Because blah. signherewithfourtildes
 
**Because blah. signherewithfourtildes
*Format shown above
+
*Format mentioned above (3 separate sections)
 
**Because blah. signherewithfourtildes
 
**Because blah. signherewithfourtildes
 
[[User:Elf|Elf]] 19:00, 12 May 2007 (PDT)
 

Revision as of 02:27, 13 May 2007

Alternative format to what's currently in the article

  1. Look at Extension directory/temp.
  2. Compare with the format of what's currently in the article.
  3. Read "Comparisons", below, and add additional notes if desired.
  4. Vote and comment on which you prefer.

Thanks. Elf 19:00, 12 May 2007 (PDT)

Comparisons

Format mentioned above:

  • Pro: If there are a lot of companies registering extensions, will make it easier to find extensions by each of the different categories.
  • Con: Same link appears in multiple places, so takes longer to insert a new one and harder to maintain.

Current article format (single table):

  • Pro: Link in only one place, so faster and easier to insert new one and to maintain list.
  • Pro: Easier to read.
  • Con: Table is arranged only by company name, so if there are a lot of companies with extensions, it's harder to view the list of profile names and of extensions by element.

Votes and comments

Which do you prefer, and why??

  • Current article format (single table)
    • Easier to read. Simpler to add to. Elf 19:27, 12 May 2007 (PDT)
    • Because blah. signherewithfourtildes
  • Format mentioned above (3 separate sections)
    • Because blah. signherewithfourtildes