Re: ObjectWare repository
Re: ObjectWare repository
- Subject: Re: ObjectWare repository
- From: Ryan Stevens <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 08:59:25 -0800
Here's an idea...
Create a Watson/Sherlock type app specifically for browsing/searching
through the Developer section(s).
Hell, you could keep Developer stuff off the Software page altogether
(unless it fits in another category) - with a link to get the
"Developer's" app.
I know it would be extra work but I think it could make things easier
(4 you and others) in the long run though. Just a thought. :-)
Oh, someone could even write a plugin for Path Finder that does this.
Now *that* could be cool...
Wishful thinking.
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 06:43 AM, Brent Gulanowski wrote:
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 01:06 AM, Scott Anguish wrote:
Objectware could be sub-categorized (it's already a subcategory of
Development)... I prefer to have the content drive the creation of
new categories, rather than over-categorizing from the start. Empty
categories just piss people off.
That makes sense.
But there isn't a good set of distinctions in the divisions you
suggest from the PowerPlant archive... All of these are very closely
related. Also, the AppKit provides more higher-level objects, so
it's unlikely we'll see a significant number (greater than 10 lets
say) table variants for example, since it's not necessary to reinvent
them from scratch. Any table will inherit from View for example.
Which is it?
Firstly, it only becomes an issue when there are hundreds of items.
You could group things based on which Cocoa class they directly
inherit from. Any grouping will have problems, but something is better
than nothing when the list gets really long.
Perhaps breaking on Foundation, Appkit, communication/internet might
work...
but what to do with collections such as the Omni ones where there are
multiple types of objects in the same collection? This seems like
it'd be better to include the types of classes that are included as
part of the keywords field.
Put these collections in a "collections" sub-category. If you use
keywords and search only, I recommend making sure that you have a
(clickable) list of all the possible keywords. Keywords are basically
a way to generate sub-categories on the fly -- it's like having
explicit categories and putting certain items in more than one. If you
have a really clever system, you could do that -- dynamically generate
a category page listing from the keywords, and that page would then
always be relevant.
I guess sourceforge does it something like that?
I also recommend another index/TOC page just like the main category
page, which lets you browse a lot of entries without scrolling.
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 12:10 AM, Jonathan Wight wrote:
The main problem with looking for source code/classes on softrak as
it
stands right now is that it doesn't seem to have subcategories. I
have to
browse through all the source code entries (or rely on luck with a
search)
to find something I might be interested in. The Powerplant archive
organised
things by class type - e.g. Views, Controls, Tables, etc.
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.