[wp-hackers] Re: Blogroll, Bookmarks, Links?
marci at odaffer.net
Fri Jun 22 08:49:04 GMT 2007
Still in the Links camp am I, and I have to agree with Scot, Leonid and
Charles. You don't put bookmarks on a website to take you to other people's
websites. You put them in your browser to take you back to places you've
been. Links might be the LCD of all our options, but the term is the most
logical to the most people. And frankly as designers and developers, we
design and develop for LCD users. If they knew what they were doing, why
would they hire us?
As for the confusion over links in posts or links in the sidebar (and
repeated questions in the forums), won't that still exist with Bookmarks?
The forum is the place to ask and answer the same questions over and over
and over, ad nauseum....what else is new? Calling the Blogroll "Bookmarks"
won't clarify anything for the terminally confused or the newbies....they
will think they are making bookmarks that somehow get magically ported to
their browser...or someone else's browser....or into their wordprocessing
program....who knows....and come to the forum wondering why they aren't
showing up wherever they expect them! As long as WP is so easy to use, we
will deal with noobs and just plain yahoos. We were all noobs once too,
remember? (But never yahoos. ;-))
All the arguments for bookmarks are almost persuasive, but ultimately Links
is still my leaning. :)
On 6/21/07, Leonid Mamchenkov <leonid at mamchenkov.net> wrote:
> On 6/22/07, Scot Hacker <shacker at birdhouse.org> wrote:
> > > From: "Charles" <lists07 at wiltgen.net>
> > >
> > > I'm embarrassed to be jumping into this thread, but Bookmarks/
> > > Favorites are
> > > a browser feature. Pages have "links", not "bookmarks" or
> > > "favorites". You
> > > bookmark a link, or add a link to favorites.
> > Well put. "Links" is short and to the point, unambiguous.
> > "Bookmarks" sounds like a feature that's somehow integrated with the
> > browser, or aware of the author's personal collection of URLs. I
> > would have to explain the concept of "Bookmarks" to clients almost as
> > much as I have to explain the current "Blogroll." "Links" would
> > require little or no explanation. It is what it says it is. I don't
> > get the appeal of "Bookmarks" at all. Why create needless confusion?
> Nicely put, indeed. I'd second this.
> A link is a link. No matter if it is in the text of the post or on
> the sidebar or in the footer. It's still just a link.
> Leonid Mamchenkov
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
kalico at kalico.net
More information about the wp-hackers