Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Cthulhudrew Mar 08, 2006 11:11:42	I was reading the Tactics and Tips article here on the Wizards' site today, and I've gotta say, I really like the embedded glossary notes that they have coded in there. I haven't noticed them before, so maybe they've been including those for a while now, but it's a pretty interesting bit of coding, IMO. (Been working a lot with dynamic html and things lately, so maybe I'm just more aware of little things like that. I think it's a new feature on the site, though.) Just observing.
#2 havard Mar 09, 2006 9:51:07	I was reading the Tactics and Tips article here on the Wizards' site today, and I've gotta say, I really like the embedded glossary notes that they have coded in there. I haven't noticed them before, so maybe they've been including those for a while now, but it's a pretty interesting bit of coding, IMO. (Been working a lot with dynamic html and things lately, so maybe I'm just more aware of little things like that. I think it's a new feature on the site, though.) Just observing. I havent noticed those before either. They could be useful, though the words explained in that article were the kind that you'd think anyone reading that particular article would know. I have no idea how to make that kind of coding though... Håvard
#3 Cthulhudrew Mar 09, 2006 10:11:47	I think it's just using bookmarks and hyperlinks, though in javascript. Probably not too difficult to do, but I've just never seen it used that way before. Pretty cool.
#4 stanles Mar 09, 2006 19:27:07	I was reading the Tactics and Tips article here on the Wizards' site today, and I've gotta say, I really like the embedded glossary notes that they have coded in there. I haven't noticed them before, so maybe they've been including those for a while now, but it's a pretty interesting bit of coding, IMO. (Been working a lot with dynamic html and things lately, so maybe I'm just more aware of little things like that. I think it's a new feature on the site, though.) Just observing. which note are you talking about Cthuludrew, I don't quite see what you're talking about?
#5 Cthulhudrew Mar 09, 2006 20:53:21	In the third paragraph (the one that starts When and Why...) there are some embedded links to glossary terms (attack, initiative). Kind of cool they way they have it set up.
#6 spellweaver Mar 10, 2006 3:22:39	In the third paragraph (the one that starts [i]When and Why...[/[i]) there are some embedded links to glossary terms (attack, initiative). Kind of cool they way they have it set up. It has been there for some time. I think that it is at least a year back that I noticed it the first time. I don't recall exactely what it is called, but at university a few years back we learned about this new trend in internet writing: that texts aren't supposed to be read in a linear fashion from a-z but rather as a sort of meta-frame for information, meaning that a text could contain a number of words functioning as links to other parts of e.g. a book. If you follow a link, you are lead to a new section about that particular word and from there new links could take you to yet other sections, possibly never leading you back to the beginning, but allowing you to skip from passage to passage in whatever way you choose. Being used to reading a text in a linear way, I find this way of organizing texts very confusing, but apparently its a trend. In the online encyclopedia Wikipedia it exists to some extend, meaning that there is links in the text to other headlines and passages. Actually, I like the link-bit of the idea, because it allows you to easily search for more related information to the text, you are currently reading. That is why I have been toying with the idea of trying to get Stanles to set up links between some of the texts at the Vault. As an example, links could be made between the Inns & Taverns section and the NPC's section because some of the NPCs I mention in an inn's description are also fleshed out in the NPC section. I realise it would be too much work for Stanles to link every time e.g. a nation is mentioned to that nations place in the Atlas section, but when it comes to more obscure information that you couldn't readily guess existed, such links would be a great service to us info-hungry DMs and players! :D :-) Jesper
#7 thorf Mar 10, 2006 6:33:12	Being used to reading a text in a linear way, I find this way of organizing texts very confusing, but apparently its a trend. In the online encyclopedia Wikipedia it exists to some extend, meaning that there is links in the text to other headlines and passages. I agree. You end up reading half of this and half of that, and never read a whole paragraph. Far better to have all relevant links at the bottom of each article. On the other hand, I think the links in question on this page are more of a definition/glossary type thing, which is fine. Windows help files have been doing it for years, and it can be very useful when you don't know the meaning of a word. As an example, links could be made between the Inns & Taverns section and the NPC's section because some of the NPCs I mention in an inn's description are also fleshed out in the NPC section. I realise it would be too much work for Stanles to link every time e.g. a nation is mentioned to that nations place in the Atlas section, but when it comes to more obscure information that you couldn't readily guess existed, such links would be a great service to us info-hungry DMs and players! :D (Emphasis is mine.) Yes, too much work and in fact counterproductive. I hate it when pages include links to things most readers will obviously know about, just because that name/concept came up in the article. For example, starwars.com's otherwise excellent databank links to the pages for the main characters at almost every opportunity. This, to me, is just silly, because everyone knows who they are anyway. It all comes down to the purpose of a link, and the effect that reading text that is linked has on our reading. For me, links are there to show related articles or to explain obscure concepts/things, but not usually to explain obvious, well known things. Moreover, links in the middle of an article which simply lead to more articles are counter-productive, since they distract from the article at hand. And finally, unnecessary links distract you from reading the passage at hand. Imagine if Karameikos was linked to the Karameikos page at every opportunity, it would be exceedingly annoying. I'd be interested to hear other opinions on this. I doubt that I am alone in these feelings, but I'm sure some people disagree with me too.
#8 agathokles Mar 10, 2006 9:13:01	And finally, unnecessary links distract you from reading the passage at hand. Imagine if Karameikos was linked to the Karameikos page at every opportunity, it would be exceedingly annoying. This is because links are usually set in a different color and underlined, but this is not necessary -- a link can be made invisible, e.g. by using style sheets:
#9 thorf Mar 10, 2006 9:59:22	This is because links are usually set in a different color and underlined, but this is not necessary -- a link can be made invisible, e.g. by using style sheets: Of course, but then you don't know it's a link. Which kinda defeats the point.
#10 spellweaver Mar 11, 2006 6:48:30	(Emphasis is mine.) Yes, too much work and in fact counterproductive. I hate it when pages include links to things most readers will obviously know about, just because that name/concept came up in the article. For example, starwars.com's otherwise excellent databank links to the pages for the main characters at almost every opportunity. This, to me, is just silly, because everyone knows who they are anyway. Well, nothing prevents you from resisting temptation and reading through the article before you try out the links. I would not go as far as calling it counterproductive. It depends on how people prefer to read texts. It all comes down to the purpose of a link, and the effect that reading text that is linked has on our reading. For me, links are there to show related articles or to explain obscure concepts/things, but not usually to explain obvious, well known things. Moreover, links in the middle of an article which simply lead to more articles are counter-productive, since they distract from the article at hand. And finally, unnecessary links distract you from reading the passage at hand. Imagine if Karameikos was linked to the Karameikos page at every opportunity, it would be exceedingly annoying. I partially agree. There is no need for links to well-known sections, such as the Atlas section, but I strongly believe that links from e.g. NPC descriptions to other articles such as how they interact in Mystara's organisations, guilds or governments or a link between a timeline and some text that explores an incident in that timeline more in depth - I think such links would be most useful. Whether they should be in the text itself or at the bottom of the article is a matter of taste. Either way is fine by me. :-) Jesper
#11 stanles Mar 15, 2006 7:09:27	It can be very confusing especially when used to excess but I think that we would be underutilising the benefits of the whole web thing if we weren't to use it at all. I appreciate that the Vaults are probably underutilising it though it does exist within the Vaults, extensively in some locations. In terms of additional links between texts these things would need to be brought to my attention if anything is to be done at all. I am not as conversant in the contents of the articles within the Vaults as the authors themselves and so may be unaware of the intricacies of linkages or potential linkages between articles. It might be a lot of work to make linkages between various articles but already by starting to think about it I am already thinking about potential programming solutions to the problem (my scripting skills built up at work can perhaps be put to use). However I would still need a list of key words to be indexed in this fashion - especially for new NPCs or that sort of thing. I would be against the idea, like Thorf, of linking the word Glantri back to the Glantri page at every instance - I don't think this would be helpful - but the links that Spellweaver suggests would probably be more useful. Yeah the linkages could be invisible, and this would be less distracting, and may be the way to go in that eventuality, though people might miss important links if they don't know that they're there - though I suppose it's better than no links at all. Of course we could set up a hierarchy of links with some being visible and most being invisible. Particular links between articles like Spellweaver suggests could be visible links and links that are more index or glossary like could be invisible ones. This could be an achievable goal.
#12 Cthulhudrew Mar 15, 2006 11:06:35	If it helps at all, Shawn, while working on the revision of the FAQ, I separated the Glossary of terms into its own page. I've currently got both items working as separate web pages (one for the FAQ- which I'll just cut and paste into the boards here- and one for the glossary). I'm still learning how to make internal links like the ones there, but my overall goal in separating the two was to be able to do just the sort of thing that I noticed the Wizards site doing the other day. This was before I saw the way they did it here, so I'm not sure which method works best.