On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:20 PM, David Cerutti <dscerutti.gmail.com> wrote:
> It's not in the master. The constant pH demonstration is still in there, I
> just moved it to a different section thinking it wasn't necessarily
> "accelerated MD." If I missed a tutorial it's very easy to add--there's
> just one line in the ToC per tutorial.
>
I don't see the constant pH tutorials here:
http://casegroup.rutgers.edu/~cerutti/amber_web/tutorials/, and I've looked
several times. And if we're encountering this much confusion discussing
this layout here (maybe there is at least some ToC under the top-level that
does refer to the CpHMD tutorial), I suspect it will be worse for users.
I'm also with Dave -- the fewer clicks you need to get to where you're
going (i.e., fewer pages), the better, and the front page is uninteresting
and confusing as it stands now.
> If the numbering scheme is haphazard and confusing it is because I am
> retaining the numbering scheme that was already there. It may only look
> haphazard now that all of the tutorials can be browsed in groups.
>
The numbering scheme should not be retained if you are fundamentally
changing how the tutorials are organized. It will only be confusing. You
should retain the same links (to keep old posts relevant), but that doesn't
mean you have to apply the A#/B# labels in the ToC.
I like the current layout (everything on the same page with a ToC in the
header that links to the sections below in the page) better. It's easier
to navigate and easier to maintain as we add (and maybe remove) tutorials.
I'm all for improving the ToC at the top of the page, but not really
splitting it across almost a dozen separate pages.
All the best,
Jason
--
Jason M. Swails
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Thu Sep 29 2016 - 09:30:03 PDT
