> On Sep 28, 2016, at 4:06 PM, Daniel Roe <daniel.r.roe.gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> It might be worthwhile to first create a separate page that shows your
> idea instead of modifying the existing page. This way you could get
> some feedback first.
>
I agree.
We can also experiment in non-official webpage: https://github.com/Amber-MD/amber-md.github.io
Hai
> -Dan
>
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 1:43 PM, David Cerutti <dscerutti.gmail.com> wrote:
>> The intention is to make the table of contents more detailed--every
>> tutorial will get a link on the front page, and each section will open in a
>> new tab or window depending on user settings. The current setup doesn't
>> really give a good idea of what is there with the seven or eight topical
>> headings. Much easier to navigate short pages that contain the topic you
>> need rather than having to scroll past lots of other tutorials. I made the
>> reformatting last night, just need to check the appearance before I
>> commit. I think it'll make things easier to see and also give new
>> tutorials better visibility.
>>> On Sep 28, 2016 8:52 AM, "David A Case" <david.case.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, Dave Cerutti wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I propose to make some changes to the ordering and grouping of the
>>>> tutorials, but none will be left out. The big change will be to have
>>> five
>>>> or six sub-pages that users can open in order to access the various
>>>> tutorials. The index page will retain most of its look and feel, but the
>>>> ToC will be expanded to have not just links to each sub-page but also a
>>>> listing with #links for each tutorial.
>>>
>>> In my opinion, this is not really an improvement. It makes it harder to
>>> browse through all the tutorials--the user has you visit a bunch of pages
>>> to get an idea of what tutorials are available. The existing table of
>>> contents at the top of the tutorials page (which could be improved) allows
>>> users to jump to a particular area of interest, which still allowing the
>>> "browsing" feature.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've also made some minor alterations to the tutorial abstracts. I'm
>>>> inclined to do away with calling tutorials "Advanced" because the notion
>>> of
>>>> advanced concepts in Amber has evolved somewhat over the years, but the
>>>> numbering system will stay in place anticipating that reflector
>>>> conversations cannot be retroactively changed. I have edited the page
>>>> source to stop warning people if things are for "Amber 9 or later" but
>>> more
>>>> recent additions retain those warnings.
>>>
>>> Above stuff sounds fine...thanks....dac
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AMBER-Developers mailing list
>>> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>> _______________________________________________
>> AMBER-Developers mailing list
>> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------
> Daniel R. Roe
> Laboratory of Computational Biology
> National Institutes of Health, NHLBI
> 5635 Fishers Ln, Rm T900
> Rockville MD, 20852
> https://www.lobos.nih.gov/lcb
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Wed Sep 28 2016 - 13:30:03 PDT
