ext_1001 (
norah.livejournal.com) wrote in
otw_news2007-05-26 02:12 pm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Proposed list of tags:
fanarchive
A few days late - sorry, new job, hectic week. I tried to keep this concise and yet cover everything I could think of that might crop up. I've set it up to follow the two- or three-tier system that
thefourthvine and I use in our sidebars, created by
murklins. If a one-tier system is more desirable I can re-think this. The main categories are archives, fanarchive, features, and planning.
In the meantime, comments? Additions? Questions? Deletions? Have at!
archives:audience & community (suggested change: archives:users and community)
archives:history
archives:legal issues
archives:meta
archives:other archives
fanarchive:admin
fanarchive:weekly summaries
features:discussion
features:suggestions
(alternatively, the prior two could be subsets of "planning")
planning:coding
planning:design
planning:funding
planning:issues
planning:moderation
planning:people & volunteering
planning:resources & maintenance
planning:tools and software
planning:universal access
Questions thus far: do we need a "content" tag? If so, where might it go (under archives, planning, etc.)? Should universal access be under "planning"? Should "archives" be plural?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
In the meantime, comments? Additions? Questions? Deletions? Have at!
archives:audience & community (suggested change: archives:users and community)
archives:history
archives:legal issues
archives:meta
archives:other archives
fanarchive:admin
fanarchive:weekly summaries
features:discussion
features:suggestions
(alternatively, the prior two could be subsets of "planning")
planning:coding
planning:design
planning:funding
planning:issues
planning:moderation
planning:people & volunteering
planning:resources & maintenance
planning:tools and software
planning:universal access
Questions thus far: do we need a "content" tag? If so, where might it go (under archives, planning, etc.)? Should universal access be under "planning"? Should "archives" be plural?
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Or do you have more info on that?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Single-tier version
Re: Single-tier version
Pseudo Two-tier version
Re: Pseudo Two-tier version
Re: Pseudo Two-tier version
Re: Pseudo Two-tier version
Re: Pseudo Two-tier version
Re: Pseudo Two-tier version
Re: Pseudo Two-tier version
Re: Pseudo Two-tier version
no subject
Would "users and community" be more inclusive, maybe?
Also wondered, maybe in a related question, about where "content" would fall in this schema?
Thank you so much for doing this!
(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2007-05-26 23:48 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Why is universal access under planning?
(I'm actually not quite sure what you mean by that. I have a couple of different ideas that could fall under that heading.)
history: of this project or of archives in general?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
I like the multi-tier thing though. I've seen it work on other comms as well, and I've used it myself on occasion.
no subject