Subject:
|
Re: lugnet.lego.* newsgroup hierarchy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 10 Aug 1999 17:21:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
332 times
|
| |
|
|
Hello Todd,
I think your organizational structure looks just fine. I look forward to a
Technic-related newsgroup. :)
As far as whether to use U.S. or non-U.S. product names, well... I think
that should be left at the discretion of the person doing all the work.
And perhaps somewhere on the site could be a small page describing what
each group talks about (although most are quite obvious). On this page
could be a small chart translating the names, as it were, of the different
product lines.
Just my 2 cents.
Regards,
Allan
--
Expert Builder Website - The Megaproject Showcase
http://www.execulink.com/~apotome/expert.htm
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in article
<37ae7f21.255531160@lugnet.com>...
>
> Ever wished there were a Fabuland newsgroup? Got a soft spot for DUPLO • Toolo?
> How about Pirates? Wild West? Castle?
>
> All of these (and more) are definitely in the plan -- it's just a matter • of
> giving them names and positions in the larger newsgroup hierarchy.
>
> Here's your chance to put in your $.02 on the naming scheme...
>
> If you want to get up to speed on past discussions, here are some links:
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/general/?n=3917&t=i&v=a
> http://www.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=850
> http://www.lugnet.com/loc/bn/?n=15
> http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=2379
> http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=1244&t=i&v=a
> http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=1193&t=i&v=a
>
> Of, if you just want to jump in here, I'll summarize everything below.
>
> Basically, we need a new branch of the newsgroup hierarchy to handle the
> entire LEGO product line. This will serve several purposes:
>
> 1. As you may know, every LUGNET newsgroup has an associated homepage on
> the www.lugnet.com website, for example:
>
> lugnet.general <==> http://www.lugnet.com/general/
> lugnet.cad.dev <==> http://www.lugnet.com/cad/dev/
> lugnet.loc.us.ca.sf <==> http://www.lugnet.com/loc/us/ca/sf/
>
> Because of this, all of the newsgroups (and their associated
> information, such as links and later FAQ entries) can be browsed
> interactively simply by clicking links in the light blue bands at the
> tops of the pages, similar to the way sites like Yahoo! work.
>
> The LUGNET/Pause database of LEGO sets isn't currently tailored • toward
> hiearchical browsing like this, but IMHO it should be -- and the best
> way to do that is to integrate the theme-browsing experience with the
> newsgroup-browsing experience, bringing dicussions and data one step
> closer together.
>
> 2. There needs to be a good way to organize stuff (links, information,
> etc.) along product line boundaries, because it's one of the main • ways
> that people browse and retrieve LEGO information.
>
> 3. There needs to be a way to organize people around thematic interests • --
> not just in offering discussion areas to talk, but in actually • allowing
> people to associate themselves (in a database way) with a theme or
> themes. This won't come automatically as a by-product of the • newsgroups
> but will come later as a by-product of the web sub-areas.
>
> 4. Last (but not least!), just about everyone seems has a favorite theme
> that they enjoy talking and/or reading about. IMHO, special interest
> groups for Fabuland, Technic, and DUPLO Toolo are long overdue!
>
> If you point your browser here:
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/sitemap.cgi?/lego/
>
> you can see about 30 categories from the official product line (not
> everything, of course, but most of the more popular ones). These are • broken
> down along the official boundaries -- meaning that, for example, Space is
> listed under LEGO SYSTEM, DUPLO Toolo is listed under LEGO DUPLO, and
> Slizer/ThrowBots is listed under LEGO TECHNIC.
>
> I think there are a couple problems with that list as currently shown. I
> believe that Belville was moved out of LEGO SYSTEM and into its own • system
> about a year ago. And Suzanne pointed out to me the other day that
> Basic/Classic isn't actually part of SYSTEM (even though FreeStyle is).
>
> These and other examples present a bit of a quandry. First of all, TLG • isn't
> always consistent about whether a given theme is a system or a theme • within a
> system. Second, how many people really think about LEGO SYSTEM when they
> think about, say, Space or Castle or Pirates?
>
> Since FreeStyle is part of LEGO SYSTEM but Basic/Classic isn't, I'd • *like* to
> think that what LEGO SYSTEM means is "minifig-scale stuff." (FreeStyle • has
> always had minifigs, after all.) But Model Team and Radio Control don't • have
> minifigs, but *are* LEGO SYSTEM. :-(
>
> Does anyone want to type 'system' in the middle of a newsgroup name? I • don't
> think so. On the other hand, flattening out that part of the hierarchy
> presents new problems (hierarchical searches, for one). But perhaps • these can
> be solved with some clever tricks.
>
> There are two main possibilities...one is the anal-retentive structure --
> which attempts to match the official product line as closely as • possible...
> the other is the more intuitive structure -- which still attempts to • match the
> official product line, but which ignores the fact that there is this • little
> thing called SYSTEM.
>
> A strong reason *not* to use SYSTEM, by the way, is because LEGO SYSTEM • wasn't
> always called that; once upon a time (late 70's to late 80's) it was • called
> LEGOLAND. (But not quite: Boats and Trains are part of LEGO SYSTEM, but • as
> far as I can tell, they weren't part of LEGOLAND when SYSTEM was called • that.
> How's that for confusing?) So organizational structures like LEGOLAND • and
> LEGO SYSTEM aren't fixed for all of time; they're somewhat transitory. • To
> make things even more confusing, LEGOLAND actually also meant something • *else*
> during the late 60's to mid-70's. (It's what eventually became LEGOLAND • Town,
> then later LEGO SYSTEM Town.)
>
> Another mess is the different types of Trains. 9v Trains are part of • LEGO
> SYSTEM (as far as I can tell), but 4.5v Trains and 12v Trains • aren't/weren't
> (as far as I can tell). :-p
>
> Anyway, here's what things would look like with the SYSTEM layer removed/
> flattened:
>
> Newsgroup name URL off the website root
> ======================================= • ==================================
> lugnet.lego.* /lego/
> lugnet.lego.adventurers /lego/adventurers/
> lugnet.lego.aquazone /lego/aquazone/
> lugnet.lego.basic /lego/basic/
> lugnet.lego.belville /lego/belville/
> lugnet.lego.books /lego/books/
> lugnet.lego.boats /lego/boats/
> lugnet.lego.castle /lego/castle/
> lugnet.lego.dacta /lego/dacta/
> lugnet.lego.duplo /lego/duplo/
> lugnet.lego.duplo.dinosaur /lego/duplo/dinosaur/
> lugnet.lego.duplo.little-forest-friends • /lego/duplo/little-forest-friends/
> lugnet.lego.duplo.toolo /lego/duplo/toolo/
> lugnet.lego.duplo.winnie-the-pooh /lego/duplo/winnie-the-pooh/
> lugnet.lego.fabuland /lego/fabuland/
> lugnet.lego.freestyle /lego/freestyle/
> lugnet.lego.lifestyle /lego/lifestyle/ • [1]
> lugnet.lego.media.* /lego/media/ • [2]
> lugnet.lego.media.chess /lego/media/chess/
> lugnet.lego.media.creator /lego/media/creator/
> lugnet.lego.media.friends /lego/media/friends/
> lugnet.lego.media.legoland /lego/media/legoland/
> lugnet.lego.media.loco /lego/media/loco/
> lugnet.lego.media.racers /lego/media/racers/
> lugnet.lego.media.rockraiders /lego/media/rockraiders/
> lugnet.lego.mindstorms /lego/mindstorms/
> lugnet.lego.modelteam /lego/modelteam/
> lugnet.lego.pirates /lego/pirates/
> lugnet.lego.primo /lego/primo/
> lugnet.lego.promo /lego/promo/ • [3]
> lugnet.lego.radiocontrol /lego/radiocontrol/ • [4]
> lugnet.lego.scala /lego/scala/
> lugnet.lego.scala.dolls /lego/scala/dolls/ • [5]
> lugnet.lego.scala.jewelry /lego/scala/jewelry/ • [5]
> lugnet.lego.service /lego/service/ • [6]
> lugnet.lego.space /lego/space/
> lugnet.lego.starwars /lego/starwars/
> lugnet.lego.technic /lego/technic/
> lugnet.lego.technic.competition /lego/technic/competition/ • [7]
> lugnet.lego.technic.slizer /lego/technic/slizer/ • [8]
> lugnet.lego.town /lego/town/
> lugnet.lego.trains /lego/trains/
> lugnet.lego.underground /lego/underground/
> lugnet.lego.western /lego/western/ • [9]
> lugnet.lego.znap /lego/znap/
>
> That makes about 28 subcategories off the main /lego/ category then. I • think
> that's still quite manageable browsing-wise. Sure beats having to click • on
> SYSTEM every time. By comparison, there are about 23 categories in the • Quick
> Links section of LouZ's intro page <http://www.lugnet.com/pause/>, and • that
> always worked well.
>
> Notes:
>
> 1. As I understand it, "Lifestyle" is a relatively new part of the TLG
> product line dealing with clothing, bedding, backpacks, etc.
> 2. lego.media.* is more closely in line with the official product line
> but another option might be lego.software.*, since "software" gets • the
> true meaning across clearer (like "books" would).
> 3. Perhaps Promotional (unofficial category) includes Holiday (another
> unofficial category).
> 4. "Radio Control" actually might be part of "Model Team"; not sure.
> 5. "Dolls" and "Jewelry" aren't official sub-categories of LEGO SCALA,
> but there has to be some way to separate the two.
> 6. Dunno if "Service" really deserves a category; just threw it in for
> completeness.
> 7. "Competition" is called "CyberSlam" in the U.S.
> 8. "Slizer" is called "ThrowBots" in the U.S.
> 9. "Western" is called "Wild West" in the U.S.
>
> Open issues:
>
> * In the above scheme of things, where do obsolete product lines like
> Homemaker, Hobby Sets, Enviro-Model, Samsonite, and Universal Building
> Set belong? (Expert Builder probably belongs with Technic, since, for
> the most part, that was just a renaming.)
>
> * Should the newsgroup names (and their corresponding URL components) • use
> the U.S. names (ThrowBots, Wild West, CyberSlam) or the non-U.S. names
> (Slizer, Western, Competition)?
>
> * There is potential duplication between
>
> lugnet.lego.trains and lugnet.trains
> lugnet.lego.starwars and lugnet.starwars
> lugnet.lego.mindstorms and lugnet.robotics
>
> depending on how the groups are structured. If these new groups are
> tailored more toward discussing the product line offerings (set • numbers,
> availability, reviews, etc.) and less toward building, then the • duplication
> becomes less of an issue. The idea behind these conversation-flow of • these
> new groups is (a) to have places to talk about the product lines and • (b)
> to have places to post a question or opinion about a set *right from • the DB
> pages for a set*, which will be waycool.
>
> --Todd
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
13 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
