[wp-hackers] Re: Blogroll, Bookmarks, Links?

[Matt]

Well said! Not to mention that if the user sees that they're called
Bookmarks, they might relate them to Bookmarks in their Browser and might
think that when they add a new "Bookmark" in WP, it'll be added to their
browser and the visitor's browser. Or, they might think that when they add a
Bookmark in their Browser, that it'll be added to WP too. Which would
defiantly create some confusion and stupid support requests.

On 6/25/07, Marci O'Daffer <marci at odaffer.net> wrote:
>
> I did a little research, because all this talk of bookmarks being a better
> term than links just hasn't seemed logical to me, but I wasn't sure why.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bookmark_%28computers%29
> Tells me that computer bookmarks (as opposed to paper bookmarks :)) are
> URLs
> stored for easy access later (in a browser or online document), and social
> bookmarks are the same thing, but public. This does not begin to describe
> what we can do with the links/bookmarks/blogroll in WP.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperlink
> Explains hyperlinks, or links for short, and their ability to help the
> user
> navigate the web. This precisely defines the core of what we have in WP:
> links around the web, with all their useful attributes.
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html
> Tells me that "links" is the common name for HTML anchors, and that they
> are
> indeed links, no matter how many attributes they may have (title, rel,
> img,
> XFN, etc).  Links are capable of much more than hrefs, but calling them
> bookmarks seems insufficient, since bookmarks (at least the ones I've seen
> so far) only do a handful of the things links can do.
>
> Bookmarks are URLs stored in your browser or on a social bookmarking site.
>
> Links are dynamic entities that take you from one web page to another, or
> help you navigate around a page or a site.
>
> Everyone can use and display their links in whatever way they want (as
> bookmarks, social or private, just plain hrefs, XFN, images) But they are
> hyperlinks at their very core, and IMHO renaming them bookmarks will lead
> to
> more confusion, not less.
>
> The term links may be as old as the web, but that is an advantage. Seems
> to
> me that a platform as universal as WP should use terminology as universal
> as
> "links".
>
> Calling them Links affords an opportunity for newbies to LEARN all that
> links are capable of (when they click the "Links" tab and discover all
> these
> extra settings they didn't expect), and then be able to transfer that
> knowledge to other situations.
>
> If we call them Links on the admin tab, I think MOST users, even the total
> newbies, will KNOW intuitively what they are for, because everyone knows
> what a link is. There will be fewer support requests, not more.
>
> Bottom line: I'm not seeing Bookmarks as the correct term for what we have
> in WP. That they aren't "just plain hrefs" I definitely agree -- but
> denying
> they are "links" denies all that links have evolved into, and elevates
> bookmarks to a status they haven't really earned. I think it also creates
> unnecessary end-user confusion, and more frustration for newbies trying to
> learn WP.
>
> That's my $.02. I will now go sit in the bikeshed.
>
> Marci :)
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>



-- 
Matt (speedboxer at gmail.com)
http://mattsblog.ca/ | http://livemp.net/