We definately need to organize the Codex much better than is the case now, but in order to be able to do so we need to agree on a set of ground rules or Guidelines
Please note any suggestions that you may have on this page, and we'll use this as a starting point for the new and better Codex.
There are many overview pages in the Gallery1 codex that pertain to Gallery2 as well. However, a few things are different. I edited a G1 page to note the differences and to link to a G2: page describing how G2 worked. A reviewer removed my changes saying that a G1 page should not have G2 info in it. This left me without a place to put my G2 documentation.
I would suggest creating a third codex: Gallery without a number. We would move pages from the G1 namespace that apply to both versions. If a page from the G1 space has some G1 specific info, then we would factor out the common information to the new G space page and create a sub page in the G1 space. We would expect many of the G pages would have links to pages in the G1 and G2 spaces.
As an example, I wanted to write a discussion on Image blocks. It would be common to both G1 and G2. I can see where to put it in G1, but there is no place in G2 to link it in.
On the codex main page I would add a table row under Gallery Documentation titled "Gallery All Versions" and immediately move the G1:What Is Gallery page into this new G: space.
If we agree to do this it would provide me (a G2 user) with a lot more places to hang new documentation.
Have I missed something?
Is it kosher or good practice to put links in the headers (== ==)? The specific page I saw doing this was Other Clients but I figure other pages are doing it too so I wanted to discuss this at a global space. I kind of doubt it but not sure what kind of policy we want to form about that. I'm not entirely sure, but I think Wikipedia tells their users not to. I think it also makes referencing the section from another page (or the same page) a little difficult as you also have to reference the link. Essentially what I'm asking is should we make it policy leave links out of header text? It's not difficult to reword the first sentence of the section to include the title and link. Zimzat 16:56, 8 June 2006 (PDT)