[support] how to add links as content types or nodes?

[will hall]

mm, well the problem with this is that they look identical to pages and 
really the display is key. it also doesn't actually show the urls. it is 
just like an empty page, titles linked to another url not the full node.

we need something that is more specific to weblinks and more like the 
display we started.

-- will

Richard Brown wrote:
> Hi Will
> 
> On 29/01/07, Richard Brown <rich at cregy.co.uk> wrote:
>>> what i am asking is for a node itself to be a link. for example, if you
>>> look at this page:
>>> http://www.theicarusproject.net/resources/web-links
>>>
>>> you will see a page with a long weblink directory of organizations and
>>> urls. however, we coded this in html! users can't add to it, it can't be
>>> sorted, it's hella hard to maintain, etc.
>>>
>>> now imagine that each link was its own special node with a small teaser
>>> and url, and the page was instead a view showing all "content type =
>>> links". sorted alphabetically, by taxonomy keywords, etc. and that users
>>> could search a taxonomy term and all the pages, blog posts, events,
>>> images AND weblinks tagged with that term would show up with their
>>> teasers. differently than page teaser views which are bigger.
>>>
>>> i.e. weblinks as nodes.
>>>
>>> does this make sense now? see the limitation we are facing? we want to
>>> provide a ton of weblinks as resources with teaser blurbs for pages like
>>> the Web Links page.
>>>
>> Could I suggest you take a look at:
>> <http://category.greenash.net.au/node/91>
>> It seems to me that if you use a category in your case say web links
>> and then create blog posts and link them to web links you can recreate
>> what you want.
>>
>> I am starting just such an exercise here:
>> <http://lostwithiel.eu/>
>> Whilst I have only set up one category that of antiques in the right
>> hand column, eventually there will be more. (I might even try to get
>> more in so you can see it happening).
>>
>> I hope this helps. Others might suggest a different way - I would be
>> very interested myself.
> I have just added a second item in the category antique and can now
> see one major flaw, it doesn't sort things alphabetically for me. This
> might not be a flaw for you, but I can see it causing a problem if you
> need to sort items in a particular way.
> 
> Any ideas please?