[un1versal]

Yep tried, thats really squint worthy editing something with that ends up being twice the work, it flickers, undoing (most controls) something (both keyboard or button) shifts from current position to end of page, generally nightmare.

uNi

[da-anda]

sorry, but it's nuts to create random wiki pages just to get a shorter URL. If the way sucks wiki links are currently parsed by the forum (which is really just a very simple custom BBcode) we can change that, but please don't create useless wiki pages for that just because we can.

[un1versal]

There's 2 reasons why short links are required, one is memorability other is the character limitation. Both impact on easiness to provide help around here.

Seems to me you guys need to discuss whatever you need to and agree on something and let me know so I can get on with things.

ATM Im liking the way Ned suggested with redirects. Something that yields same results would be great.

uNi

[Martijn]

I vote definitely against
The arguments you gave do not justify creating countless redirects.
Especially character limitation. Why are you hogged up on stuffing your signature with countless links.
You can provide the same help without shortening the wiki URLs.
Like I already said, shortening the link does not by default make it easier. Longer wiki link can provide way more info like what is the main page and what subsection do you want me to read instead of bluntly dumping a user in the middle of a wiki page without know how he got there.

[joebrady]

Well then just link to the wiki page on the forum.
Showing the full wiki link gives users a better idea where to look next time instead of some quick obscure link

+1

[Ned Scott]

Well then just link to the wiki page on the forum.
Showing the full wiki link gives users a better idea where to look next time instead of some quick obscure link

+1

I don't see how this is true in any way.

[Ned Scott]

If you guys want to fight uNiversal on this, then you're going to have to fight me on this. I'm allowing it. If uNiversal wants to make 1,000 redirects he's damn well earned it in how much wiki work he's done. I've been actively encouraging the creation of redirects for the last year for this exact situation, to make linking from the forum to the wiki easier. There is zero reason to object. It has no impact on performance, it doesn't break linking, it doesn't make finding pages harder, and I don't think uNi is going to make a billion pointless redirects. Right now the wiki has 1,845 redirects, which is more than the number of pages with real content on them, and it's never been an issue before. http://wiki.xbmc.org/index.php?title=Spe...0&offset=0

Redirects have allowed even 5 year old links to the wiki to still work even if the page has changed names 5 or 6 times.

Believe me, I've had massive discussions back on Wikipedia about this. The philosophy there has been that "redirects are cheap", and we don't have to conserve them for any reason.

[Martijn]

I stand by my point on this.
If I find any silly (read in no way needed) redirection I will remove it.
If you need to many redirections something must change in the layout.

[un1versal]

+1 for @ned Scott reasoning (not that my vote counts)

@Martijn trying to answer your question.

If you see this from the perceptive of memorability, speed and referring to specific information, from someone who actually refers to this information OFTEN on daily basis on several threads to various users on a range of subjects it is very important,
I dont see what the big deal is when Im trying to use the resources available to make my life easier (for the benifit of a community) and provide better support while at same time making users aware there are resources on wiki and forums that can be referenced other then telling them to RTFM and or use search, stick to rules etc.

To me since I have several limitations making it easier for myself is important and I appreciate @ned Scott for sharing his know-how and support.

@joebrady

idk about you, but most of my replies to especially ppl which made some effort in their request for help (not the 1 time posters which cant be bothered to post information or proper request or search), one makes some effort to indicate to user where to look specifically, so that (content of link) is self implied what its about by the user question.
While a long descriptive link makes things recognizable and more difficult for e.g. me who has to remember the whole lot or as it is mostly the case now, spend 30+ seconds searching copying and posting links and typing reply (thinking has what I said made some sense editing myself because my main language is not English)..

uNi

[Martijn]

* Martijn taps the microphone and checks if it's on.

I see the big deal in this. Sorry for being honest.
Still failing to see the use for it and you won't convince me.

What is wrong with having Add-on_development#addon.xml (wiki)
This clearly show where it's a subsection from and where it belongs.
Just having addon.xml (wiki) tells you nothing.
Why because it's not pretty? It's about provinding usefull info and not for having a beauty award.

and what's wrong with having this PVR/Backend/MythTV#Connecting_XBMC_to_MythTV (wiki)
easy c/p, users see that's about pvr and it's backend MythTV
making a short redirect totally blows that. Don't tell me you are always typing out the links, everyone c/p
Another point is that the title is wrong. You are already on a subpage of MythTV, is plain ovious you want to connect it to XBMC.
So title should be "Connecting" instead of "Connecting_XBMC_to_MythTV".

Believe me i've done numerous written manuals, help pages and studied communications and technical/user manuals.

[Ned Scott]

making a short redirect totally blows that

No it doesn't. Page names are not supposed to indicate structure. They can, but it's never been a requirement that they do. The ONLY reason that the MythTV page is there is to enable automatic breadcrumb links on the page itself, and nothing more.

For example, I'm thinking of getting rid of the "HOW-TO:" namespace and prefix because it's such a fine line between what is a "general topic" and what is a "how-to", that it doesn't make sense to define that with a page title.

Even if you follow a redirect, the actual displayed page title is always correct.

I do this all the time. I've been doing it forever. It's done all over the wiki. You are only are objecting because it's uNiversal asking and you don't trust him. Frankly, that's really pissing me off.

[Martijn]

I do this all the time. I've been doing it forever. It's done all over the wiki. You are only are objecting because it's uNiversal asking and you don't trust him. Frankly, that's really pissing me off.

and that's where you are so totally wrong.
i object in general whoever it is.

Well do whatever you like then.
Page name structure is good practice even its not done before.
Guess I should throw away half a year of my engineering degree.

The how-to are indeed not needed or don't really indicate anything because almost any page can be how-to.

[Ned Scott]

I do this all the time. I've been doing it forever. It's done all over the wiki. You are only are objecting because it's uNiversal asking and you don't trust him. Frankly, that's really pissing me off.

and that's where you are so totally wrong.
i object in general whoever it is

They're title aliases. They prevent broken links, they feed google with alternative terms and titles, they catch more links, and they make things easier to link to on the forum. I don't copy/paste, because looking things up for each and every forum post takes up too much time. I link as I type, using short titles that I can remember. This very ability has been requested before. It has zero negative impact on how things are done, and only positive impact for helping people find stuff and to encourage them to link to the wiki.

It is absurd that this has escalated this far over a feature that most of you don't even understand. On top of it, you're so caught up in the argument that you don't even stop to consider my explanation on how redirects work.

[un1versal]

This is a typical example of how Redirects are 100% helpful as a example for making information linked to from forums easier to spread via general public.

can you give me a full debug log when this happens please

That post is constructed like this

Code:

can you give me a full [url=http://wiki.xbmc.org/index.php?title=Log_file]debug log[/url] when this happens please

It could have been constructed like this using redirect

Code:

can you give me a full [[debug log]] when this happens please

Yielding

can you give me a full debug log (wiki) when this happens please

Would that not be easier/faster/efficient and simpler to both remember and conveys exact same info?

And

Code:

[[PVR/Backend/MythTV#Connecting_XBMC_to_MythTV]]

easier to remember if for e.g just referred to in a forum post

Code:

[[Connect to MythTV]]

Which wont work btw because theres no redirect.

We already know that it is referring to PVR (because if we post that link its a PVR related support question) and that MythTV is a backend and obviously We are in XBMC so for support wise for person providing support its easier to remember the later rather than the former.

++This doesn't change how information is held in wiki or what tittles goto what as I understand it it goes to benefit everyone and should be made available.

Ultimately it comes down to this, no matter what info is in wiki if no one finds it easy to refer to and spread it around the public the harder it is to provide help referring to said existing documentation. Caveats not withstanding.

Thx @ned for actually getting the point.

Thanks to all.

uNi

[da-anda]

why would we want double content in googles search index using tons of aliase pages/urls showing the very same information? Every company website that want's a good google ranking tries to prevent that. Can the redirects be enforced to really redirect to the target URL and not just show it's content?

Would something like this help you guys?

Code:

[[PVR/Backend/MythTV#Connecting_XBMC_to_MythTV:Connect to MythTV]]

or [wiki=PVR/Backend/MythTV#Connecting_XBMC_to_MythTV]Connect to MythTV[/wiki] (which is already possible atm)

Ofc with the requirement that those links don't add to the max length in signatures