- This wiki is out of date, use the continuation of this wiki instead
Talk:Network DLL
From FenixWiki
| Revision as of 13:19, 15 April 2007 (edit) Yonni (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 22:55, 15 April 2007 (edit) (undo) Sandman (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| I thought that the category was for anything to do with DLLs (inc functions, general information, etc) and therefore a list of DLLs was neccesary to narrow this to just the pages of the DLLs. But if I'm wrong I'll put things back to the way they were. What do you think?<br> | I thought that the category was for anything to do with DLLs (inc functions, general information, etc) and therefore a list of DLLs was neccesary to narrow this to just the pages of the DLLs. But if I'm wrong I'll put things back to the way they were. What do you think?<br> | ||
| --[[User:Yonni|Yonni]] 14:18, 15 April 2007 (GMT) | --[[User:Yonni|Yonni]] 14:18, 15 April 2007 (GMT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'd say the following: We give DLL's the category "dll" and a private category (like "networkdll"). Any article closely related to that DLL gets that category aswell. The functions in that DLL get a seperate private category (like "networkdllfunctions"). This way, one automatic list is generated for DLL's, one for each of their associated articles and one for each of their functions. No manual updating needed. In the category "dll" can be listed the DLL's not yet written about. I'll adjust Network.dll to this system to see if it works.<br /> | ||
| + | --[[User:Sandman|Sandman]] 00:55, 16 April 2007 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 22:55, 15 April 2007
Thanks for adding those links. But the link to the list of Fenix DLL's should be handles by the category link DLL, no? I dunno exactly how this works.
--Sandman 02:09, 14 April 2007 (CEST)
I thought that the category was for anything to do with DLLs (inc functions, general information, etc) and therefore a list of DLLs was neccesary to narrow this to just the pages of the DLLs. But if I'm wrong I'll put things back to the way they were. What do you think?
--Yonni 14:18, 15 April 2007 (GMT)
I'd say the following: We give DLL's the category "dll" and a private category (like "networkdll"). Any article closely related to that DLL gets that category aswell. The functions in that DLL get a seperate private category (like "networkdllfunctions"). This way, one automatic list is generated for DLL's, one for each of their associated articles and one for each of their functions. No manual updating needed. In the category "dll" can be listed the DLL's not yet written about. I'll adjust Network.dll to this system to see if it works.
--Sandman 00:55, 16 April 2007 (CEST)
