Open Stack

How about describing the hierarchy in IDs, but not necessarily with ch_,
section_, etc? For example:

ch_networking -> networking
section_neutron-networking-ml2 -> networking-neutron-ml2
section_neutron-ml2-controller-node ->
networking-neutron-ml2-controller-node

Also, would it help to indicate type in figure, table, and similar element
IDs? For example:

example-architecture-with-legacy-networking ->
fig_example-architecture-with-legacy-networking
table1 -> tab_getstart-openstack-services (from common/ch_getstart.xml)
para3 -> par_getstart-3 (from common/ch_getstart.xml)

Or... am I still the totally crazy noob?

P.S. - I'm also interested in ideas for standardizing filenames and/or
locations for figures.


On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Diane Fleming
<diane.fleming at rackspace.com>wrote:

>  +1 for file name conventions
> -1 for xml:id conventions
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2014, at 6:28 PM, "Anne Gentle" <anne at openstack.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Steve Gordon <sgordon at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Anne Gentle" <anne at openstack.org>
>> > To: "Andreas Jaeger" <aj at suse.com>
>> >
>> > Something to think about for ch and sec is that we won't always author
>> in a
>> > book-like manner, so let's not lock ourselves into that sort of thinking
>> > due to current file names.
>> >
>> > Stick to the install guide for now, to apply conventions, just please
>> don't
>> > use something as meaningful semantically as chapter and section.
>>
>>  I actually think it's important/useful information in the filename. It
>> reflects the root node of the file's XML which has an impact on where you
>> can nest/include it in another document (you can't include a chapter in a
>> section for example, but you can include a section in a chapter). It's got
>> more to do with the realities of the format being used than whether we're
>> thinking in terms of books, articles, etc.
>>
>
>  I agree it's a useful codification in the file name, but I don't think
> we want it in the xml:id. The xml:id is used for SEO, for human-readable
> URLs, and so on. Let's not leak our abstraction further than we have to. :)
> Anne
>
>
>>
>> Granted if we moved to a non-XML format this would no longer be the case,
>> but I think we'd have bigger conversion issues than bulk renaming the
>> files/links. ;)
>>
>> -Steve
>>
>
>    _______________________________________________
> Openstack-docs mailing list
> Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openstack-docs mailing list
> Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20140526/72fc62dd/attachment-0001.html>