Subject:
|
Re: CFD: lugnet.lego.* newsgroup hierarchy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Aug 1999 05:58:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
181 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi Matthew,
Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote in message
news:slrn7rk4jf.dm1.mattdm@jadzia.bu.edu...
> Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> > There are two main possibilities...one is the anal-retentive structure --
> > which attempts to match the official product line as closely as • possible...
>
> I'm a big fan of throwing away TLG's naming scheme and using something
> logical instead. :) I'd go further than just throwing out "system" -- I'd
> reorganize the whole mess.
I agree here. I believe that if TLG is moving things around and changing
numbers and names that it would probably be better. At least then we would
have a better scheme in place and wouldn't have to restructure every time
they changed what system a theme goes in (or whatever they've been doing).
However, I think we would have to at least have some sort of cross-reference
to their scheme, not necessarily updating every item, but have a general
page that notes which of their names go with ours. I'm not sure though,
would it be more of a headache to create a new scheme and organize
everything accordingly or just update our lists when they change theirs?
Maybe I don't agree, I don't know. It's 2am my brain isn't working so good
and my cat has fallen off the arm rest twice already. I think I just need
to go to bed.
'nite,
Adam
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: CFD: lugnet.lego.* newsgroup hierarchy
|
| (...) I'm a big fan of throwing away TLG's naming scheme and using something logical instead. :) I'd go further than just throwing out "system" -- I'd reorganize the whole mess. I realize this comment may not be so helpful, because it doesn't fit (...) (25 years ago, 18-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
