bad wiki timeline link

[Geert Janssens]

On Saturday 08 August 2015 11:44:00 Chris Good wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Ralls [mailto:jralls at ceridwen.us]
> > Sent: Saturday, 1 August 2015 9:42 AM
> > To: Chris Good <chris.good at ozemail.com.au>
> > Cc: gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> > Subject: Re: bad wiki timeline link
> > 
> > > On Jul 31, 2015, at 2:01 PM, Chris Good
> > > <chris.good at ozemail.com.au>
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On page
> > > http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Documentation_Update_Instructions,
> > > link
> > 
> > http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/timeline doesn't work.
> > 
> > > If some-one can tell me what it should be or if it should be
> > > removed,
> > > I'll update it?
> > > 
> > > Please copy me on the reply as I only get daily gnucash-user mail.
> > 
> > We’re not using trac any more, so it should be removed. I don’t see
> > anything in that page that says anything about it, so it doesn’t
> > need replacing, either.
> > 
> > If you have time it would be nice to convert those references into
> > proper footnotes or embedded links.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > John Ralls
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> AFAICT the Wiki Cite extension (footnotes) is designed more for citing
> actual published papers or books rather than URLs as the text you put
> ref tags around is shown in the automatically generated footnote.
> 
> It seems to me (maybe I'm getting totally the wrong impression), some
> people (not naming anyone in particular Geert...) prefer to not have
> the actual URL in the body of the text, just in the footnote.
> 
As you mention my name here...

Where I add URL's is heavily dependent on the context. In e-mail 
messages (non-html ones), I tend to group all URL's at the bottom of the 
mail. I do that to avoid issues with poor word wrapping that some e-mail 
clients do and to improve the readability of the message in general.

Wiki's however are totally different. I usually embed the URL's in the 
text. And I rarely show the plain URL. I normally choose a few relevant 
words which will become the html anchor for the URL. Like "REFERENCES" 
becomes a link to the references in the wiki page we're talking of in 
the mail.

> I'm OK with adding the URL where it is first referenced, so it could
> also appear in the footnotes. Anybody have objections?
> 
I have no strong opinion on whether we should keep a list of references 
separately and whether or not it should be converted into footnotes. The 
advantage of using citation is that the numbering will always remain 
consistent. In this case however, we might as well use the reference 
links directly in the steps they try to add context to instead of 
working with a separate list of references. That requires less jumping 
around on the page while getting acquainted with the process of updating 
the documentation

As said I don't have a strong opinion here. As far as I'm concerned use 
your own good judgment.

Regards,

Geert