Tagging case studies - yes that makes sense - so then the hard node reference to the actual project (as opposed to a mention) means you could have a view of case studies showing all the modules used with direct links, browsable by tag.<br>
<br>So in the right sidebar of the download and extend page, you still have a list like:<br><br>Media<br>Government<br>Technology<br><br>Upon clicking media, you'd see:<br>-<br>Warner Bros. | Views, CCK, Embedded Media Field | some other tags | date posted (or whatever)<br>
Some Record label | Audio, Panels<br>Photo gallery site building howto | imagefield, imagecache, lightbox<br><br>etc. etc.<br><br>The advantage there is you get lists of modules which are actually used / documented, rather than lists of modules who's authors could be bothered to tag them.<br>
<br>And yeah there's definitely no harm in having the vocabulary and trying it out for a while, I was just very fond of the showcase idea and didn't want it to get lost ;)<br><br>Nat<br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Gábor Hojtsy <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gabor@hojtsy.hu">gabor@hojtsy.hu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Then instead of referencing the nodes from the case studies attaching<br>
taxonomy terms to the references, we can tag the case studies<br>
themselves, and just have taxonomy lists of case studies on those<br>
links, can't we? I mean if you'd use this data from actual case<br>
studies, then why not show the modules in context, where the usage is<br>
actually described?<br>
<br>
Note: IMHO we can remove the types of sites vocabulary always, if we<br>
find it is not working well.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Gábor<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Nathaniel Catchpole<br>
<<a href="mailto:catch56@googlemail.com">catch56@googlemail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> In the redesign discussions, we'd discussed having nodereferences between<br>
> case studies, site recipes and projects for this purpose rather than tags.<br>
> That way, people documenting how particular types of sites are built could<br>
> show which modules they used - as opposed to project owners saying 'I think<br>
> this might be useful for'. You could then show showcases and site recipes<br>
> next to modules, and modules next to showcases and site recipes in a<br>
> structured way (and with some data munging, get aggregate data if needed).<br>
> Was this discussed as an option?<br>
><br>
> Nat<br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>