But this issue goes far further then 'just fix a usability issue'. it needs a lot of thought, ideas and tests, IMO. not a simple 'yea, to outliner'. That will not solve anything.
Care to explain why it wouldn't solve anything? IMO, having a more desprective module name does make a difference for new users.
For what it's worth, I think "outliner" is an absolutely horrible name. An "outliner" software *means* something, and they'll expect the usage of that name to mean what they expect (which is why "category" was such a horrible choice for "taxonomy") - it'd be like an OPML editor (like Dave Winer's) or OmniOutliner. If you'd like to try out a crossplatform (Java) opensource outliner, that mimicks what people expect an "outliner" will do, check out the screens here: http://outliner.sourceforge.net/. In short, our book.module is absolutely nothing like an outliner. An outliner needs to be *quick*. Our book module requires about 3 million more clicks than an outliner-expectant user is going to put up with. -- Morbus Iff ( you are nothing without your robot car, NOTHING! ) Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ O'Reilly Author, Weblog, Cook: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus