I just asked two people (my fiancee and my 18 year old sister to be specific) and both told me that a URL is a 'web address'. They didn't knew what a 'path alias' is, and could not place it either. Maybe it's a language thing, but in Belgium the acronym URL is understood by many people and almost as common as 'e-mail' or 'chat'.

Exactly right: a web address. Is "about" a web address? Cos that's what we're asking people to type in, not "http://drupal.org/about". /me is upset at the dilution of meaning, but will hush up about it. -- Morbus Iff ( hey britney, you say you want to lose control? ) Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus

...

...

I just asked two people (my fiancee and my 18 year old sister to be specific) and both told me that a URL is a 'web address'. They didn't knew what a 'path alias' is, and could not place it either. Maybe it's a language thing, but in Belgium the acronym URL is understood by many people and almost as common as 'e-mail' or 'chat'.

Dries, to do some math here: * 9 people -1'd the patch, with complaints about "Custom URL". * 6 people +1'd the patch. Actually, this would normally be 8, but 2 people said they +1'd as "better than path alias", but didn't actually like "Custom URL" any better. You'd feel good about committing code that: * [either] had a majority against it? * [or] was split in half regarding approval? Is this just code-freeze rush that we're pumped up about? -- Morbus Iff ( and i twirled my hair and i popped my gum ) Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus

You'd feel good about committing code that:

* [either] had a majority against it? * [or] was split in half regarding approval?

Occasionally, yes.

Is this just code-freeze rush that we're pumped up about?

What is that question's purpose? -- Dries Buytaert :: http://www.buytaert.net/

...

...

You'd feel good about committing code that:

* [either] had a majority against it? * [or] was split in half regarding approval?

Occasionally, yes.

...

Is this just code-freeze rush that we're pumped up about?

What is that question's purpose?

I was implying that you're anxious to get this patch addressed so that it'll get into core for 4.7, when the patch itself isn't liked by a majority of the folks who've commented. Indeed, the first two comments you received after "I need reviewers!" was -1. Is that the sort of response you had hoped for?

Well, Dries asked and received comments from developers, while he also tries to cater to the everyday newbie user, of which reviewers are very much under represented. You can do the math, but the opinions seen are not of users but developers, so yout results are going to be false. Now since this is not a development environment change, it needs the mind of a user to look at. Goba

...

Well, Dries asked and received comments from developers, while he also tries to cater to the everyday newbie user, of which reviewers are very much under represented. You can do the math, but the opinions seen are not of users but developers, so yout results are going to be false. Now since this is not a development environment change, it needs the mind of

Alright then. Am I to infer that Drupal is more than willing to teach users the wrong thing, solely because that is their expectation?

Reading this sentence, it seems you assume something wrong is going to happen. Instead you should help gather some people to support your ideas which are supposed to be better :) Goba

At 3:53 PM -0400 4/10/05, Morbus Iff wrote:

As for "support", there are at least 9 folks who think that "Custom URL" is not the right approach, and at least 3 or 4 who think that "URL Path" is better. Most of the rest have all attempted to offer alternatives that include the visual part of the URL:

Custom URL, http://disobey.com/[________________]

Putting the http://blah/ before the text box is a usability nightmare. If you're worried about users entering their full URL into the form simply have the form handler automagically strip it off and just store the the path. I would also argue until I'm blue in the face that "URL path" is as meaningless to the average user as "path alias". In the user's mind what they are doing is customizing the URL of a node and that's how Drupal should refer to the process. The patch as it stands is a massive improvement over the existing code and gets a big +1 from me. ...R.

Ok... My first 2 cents as I am tired of these hundreds of messages saying the same thing... Morbus is right, the 'Custom URL' is wrong. 'URL path' is confusing (or so they say). what about 'Custom URL path'? I know it is kinda big... But it is also right, isn't it? As you are asking specifically for the path, and the users who 'might' me confused by reading only 'URL path' have their 'custom' word there and Drupal isn't going to be 'teaching the wrong thing'... Regards, - Luis Sergio On 10/4/05, Morbus Iff <morbus@disobey.com> wrote:

...

...

Custom URL, http://disobey.com/[________________]

Putting the http://blah/ before the text box is a usability nightmare. If you're worried about users entering their full URL into the form

Hey, I don't like it either. I don't think it's the proper solution.

-- 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<http://jabber.org>: morbus

Morbus Iff wrote:

...

...

I just asked two people (my fiancee and my 18 year old sister to be specific) and both told me that a URL is a 'web address'. They didn't knew what a 'path alias' is, and could not place it either. Maybe it's a language thing, but in Belgium the acronym URL is understood by many people and almost as common as 'e-mail' or 'chat'.

Exactly right: a web address. Is "about" a web address? Cos that's what we're asking people to type in, not "http://drupal.org/about".

Incidentally, I'm *not* suggesting that "path alias" is better. Merely that "custom URL" is not it. As I've suggested in the original issue, "URL path" is a combination of both worlds, is accurate semantically, and more importantly, accurate operationally: what the user types in is exactly what the box is asking for (not a "custom URL", but a "URL path", which "about" would be considered).

A couple of observations on the discussion so far:- 1. A few people like the idea of having a UI presentation of the input field of the form: http://www.example.com/base/ [ enter-rest-of-url-here... ]. The only real objection to this is that the form api's don't make this possible. If thats the only real objection then we should create a new form "object" for this type of input style. Saying we can't do it because of the form api is not the way to address usability issues. 2. Wordpress calls the field "post slug" along with a path-auto style prefilled text field. This name has no direction relation to technical meaning of the concept. But, I can find no debate on the Wordpress forums as to its meaning. By divorcing the name from the technical jargon, and auto populating it the appear to have successfully sidestepped the debate. (But the post slug only becomes part of the URL if the permalinks global option is configured to use it). David

On 10/5/05, David Angier <david@angier.co.uk> wrote:

2. Wordpress calls the field "post slug" along with a path-auto style prefilled text field. This name has no direction relation to technical meaning of the concept. But, I can find no debate on the Wordpress forums as to its meaning. By divorcing the name from the technical jargon, and auto populating it the appear to have successfully sidestepped the debate. (But the post slug only becomes part of the URL if the permalinks global option is configured to use it).

If I recall correctly (I haven't gone to look up the original thread), this debate started because it was asserted that 'custom URL' was in common use among other equivelent systems and Drupal's using a different term was confusing. We have now heard of many CMS systems using something very different from 'custom URL' and this is suddenly the preferred route for some. Drupal uses terminology which is accurate of its implementation and uses words (URL, alias) that most agree are commonly understood by the relatively internet savvy (those who would be contributing to a website for example). In my opinion this debate has no focus and the issue should be left for another release following appropriate usability studies. I believe that some of the prompts surrounding this feature could be better worded but the changes being discussed seem inappropriate based on the arguments I've heard so far. Cheers, Chris

I would reiterate that we are not asking the user the enter a URL. The help text makes it clear (or should) that only a path is to be entered. The 'custom URL' is the path by which the node will be accessed and IS a URL.

Your semantics are wrong. A path is part of a URL. A URL contains a path, but it is not a path itself. "The path by which a node will be accessed and IS a URL" is an incorrect statement - a path is nothing but a path by itself. "about" is not a URL. "about" is a path. "http://drupal.org/path" is a URL. It is not a path. Your statement is wrong. If you can't get it straight, then you shouldn't be voting. By your reasoning, the PATH_INFO environment variable would include the domain and all that crap in it - cos hey, that's all the stuff that makes up a URL, custom or otherwise. But, it doesn't - it only contains the path information. Dare you accuse the HTTP specs of BEING WRONG?! <g> --------------------------------------------------------------------- Help is not a crutch. If help is needed to clarify things, then the thing it is clarifying is not clear enough. If all the Drupal help text was removed, many people will enter full URLs into "Custom URL", because that's what it is asking for, not a URL path. This is key. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I AGREE IMMENSELY. DO YOU? [________________] [small]Actually, I don't agree. But your argument suggests that my lie is a-ok because HEY! We got some swanky help text that clarifies ourselves! Who cares if the heading is wrong! The help text LIVES![/small] BODY [__________________] [small]Actually, this isn't ONLY the body. See, you can add a little bit of text that says "this part is the teaser of the body, in the body itself". But, we'll just lie and say "body" cos, pff, who needs a teaser as a second form field, right? ROFFLE. -- 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

...

I would reiterate that we are not asking the user the enter a URL. The help text makes it clear (or should) that only a path is to be entered. The 'custom URL' is the the path by which the node will be accessed and IS a URL.

If the description text is so clear, then why is this even an issue in the first place?

People don't read descriptions/help texts. Goba