I agree with Hai, I think we all appreciate effort at making the web site,
tutorials, manuals etc better. don't take our critical feedback as a sign
your efforts aren't appreciated - critical feedback is just what we do :)
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Hai Nguyen <nhai.qn.gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Cerutti <dscerutti.gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm very sorry to have wasted everyone's time with this. I will correct
> my
> > tutorials.
> >
>
> I think it's good to have someone like you to play with layout/TOC ... to
> make better website.
>
> Hai
>
>
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Jason Swails <jason.swails.gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Thu Sep 29 2016 - 12:30:03 PDT
