User talk:Dan Tobias
From Just Solve the File Format Problem
(Difference between revisions)
(→CSS: new section) |
Dan Tobias (Talk | contribs) (→CSS) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
We need to figure out how to deal with disambiguation pages. It is obvious that [[CSS]] can be either [[Cascading Style Sheets]] or [[Content Scramble System]], and I don't think this particular wiki should give preference to one known value over another if the abbreviation can be expanded to an unambiguous name. That's why I linked to [[CSS]] on the [[DVD]] page, rather than linking directly to [[Content Scramble System]]. Unless we plan to sort this out immediately, it might be best to leave that link in place, so that we don't lose track of it. Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley|talk]]) 02:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC) | We need to figure out how to deal with disambiguation pages. It is obvious that [[CSS]] can be either [[Cascading Style Sheets]] or [[Content Scramble System]], and I don't think this particular wiki should give preference to one known value over another if the abbreviation can be expanded to an unambiguous name. That's why I linked to [[CSS]] on the [[DVD]] page, rather than linking directly to [[Content Scramble System]]. Unless we plan to sort this out immediately, it might be best to leave that link in place, so that we don't lose track of it. Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley|talk]]) 02:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Perhaps the current CSS article should be moved to Cascading Style Sheets, and a Content Scramble System article created, with [[CSS]] as a disambig article linking to both. But in that case, any specific links to a particular kind of CSS should link directly to the proper one of the articles, not the disambig one. [[User:Dan Tobias|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias|talk]]) 02:18, 29 November 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 02:18, 29 November 2012
CSS
We need to figure out how to deal with disambiguation pages. It is obvious that CSS can be either Cascading Style Sheets or Content Scramble System, and I don't think this particular wiki should give preference to one known value over another if the abbreviation can be expanded to an unambiguous name. That's why I linked to CSS on the DVD page, rather than linking directly to Content Scramble System. Unless we plan to sort this out immediately, it might be best to leave that link in place, so that we don't lose track of it. Thoughts? Gphemsley (talk) 02:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps the current CSS article should be moved to Cascading Style Sheets, and a Content Scramble System article created, with CSS as a disambig article linking to both. But in that case, any specific links to a particular kind of CSS should link directly to the proper one of the articles, not the disambig one. Dan Tobias (talk) 02:18, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
