SAKWiki Poll - Remove TOC from Knife Pages

[ICanFixThat]

Each Knife page follows the overview desciption with a Table Of Contents box (Example).  I'm strongly thinking it is time to remove this TOC box as its screen space is not warranted given the size of the individual pages.  You can have some influence on this decision with your vote.

[Grant Lamontagne]

Not to derail this thread on the second post, but I'd just like to take a moment to thank you and the few others that are working so hard to make SAKWiki such an amazing reference.  You guys are doing an amazing job, and every time I log in there I'm amazed at how much better it's gotten since the last time I looked at it, let alone what it was like when it started!

My hat's off to you and the other guys who have put so much effort into it.

Def

[alelser]

I second Def's derailment! Thanks. SAKwiki rocks. Half my job today, and nearly all of my previous career was research. I appreciate a good reference.

As to your question, I think if you left the format the same for each page you could probably do without it. That said, being a researcher I appreciate a TOC (and especially a well-indexed index), and the lazy side of me likes the hot links within the TOC (which I do use when looking at the various knife pages). My vote would be to keep it. It's a great convenience.

-Al-

[Neil]

I don't use the TOC personally but I don't see it as a great problem.  I'd leave it as is.

[Gareth]

Keep it.  Like alelser I'm actually lazy enough to use the hot links.

[ICanFixThat]

Any comments on this possible layout?

It may not be very nice for small screens though.

[Gareth]

Personally I prefer the original layout.

[ICanFixThat]

Comments on possible layout-2 ?

The first is just not good for small screens. This second one in some cases would allow for larger images, and is good for narrow screens.

[edursr]

Well, I like it the way it is... 

[ICanFixThat]

We have layout option 3  LAST ONE.


First answer the poll; "No" / Keep-it in the poll question means don't touch anything!

Then comment on other possible layouts if you desire, but that's secondary.

[alelser]

Like the original best with layout change 1 as a close second.

[Gareth]

Option 2 IMO. Or just keep it as is.

[SRSemenza]

I voted to drop the table of contents. It doesn't seem useful when the items all right below it. I Always end up scrolling anyway. Perhaps that space could be better used.

Seth

[jerseydevil]

I think that option 2 looks the best.  It's nice and compact, and as mentioned looks better on a smaller screen.

[Reinier]

Am I the only one who prefers option 3?

[AHB]

You're doing a great job and I'll definitely vote for the second TOC option.. 

[AimlessWanderer]

I like the look of option 3 - but voted for removing TOC. With size pages as they are I don't think it's necessary.

In it's place you could put physical sizes, weights, number of layers, number of functions, scales etc so the intro and pic line also has all the key info which would apply to all SAK variations, with additional supporting information listed below. Would simplify the layout, make each page more concise, and reduce/remove the need for a TOC altogether IMHO.

Another thing I'd LOVE to see, would be a hotlinked list in each of the tools descriptions as to what models they are on Could this be done? I'd love to be able to click on a tool description such as combo tool, or marlin spike, or nail file and see a full list of everything that tool was used on and have a link to the various models. If done manually I'd imagine it would be a nightmare to try and do, but I'm not techy enough to know if there's a way to "automate" or simplify this

Just my £0.02

BTW - thanks to anyone/everyone who is involved in this wiki. It seves as a great tool for those (such as me) who wouldn't know a climber from a huntsman without this point of reference

 

[Cyclone82]

I like the new layer index but i also like how it was a few weeks back. I would also like it so there was a lists of all Vics on the one page like the Wengers. I think the Vic section was like that but this changed a few weeks back and now the Vics are only listed by knife length. And yes i would like to say good job on it. Its has been great to be able to research each model.

I notice you have a ? next to 'shark' in 108mm series. I can 100% confirm these do exist as i have one. Only 52 made.

[ICanFixThat]

... Another thing I'd LOVE to see, would be a hotlinked list in each of the tools descriptions as to what models they are on Could this be done? ...

You can do use the backlinks dropdown box at the top of each tool page to see all the pages that reference the tool.  The main problem with this is that they are not hot links, just a list, Wenger and Victorinox tools are mixed on the same page (that's likely to change in the not too distant future), sizes are mixed on a page (that is not likely to change).

Many nice interface features are limited by the old Wiki software used and the fact that it is simply wiki based, and a static page design.  Trying to make the best of it, and one positive note is it's very basic and easy to use the site.  Sort of like the SAK, simple, not too simple, works great.

---

Thanks for all the nice comments, I'm happy many are finding the site useful.


The Vote:

This is running pretty neck and neck, so I suspect things will not be changing soon.  In the mean time you can checkout the new graphical layer selection for the Vic 91mm selections.  This will likley be propogating... just when you think you've finished a feature....

[ICanFixThat]

...
I notice you have a ? next to 'shark' in 108mm series. I can 100% confirm these do exist as i have one. Only 52 made.

Oh there in no doubt they exist.  The '?' is put there automatically by Wiki Software to indicate that a referenced page does not yet exist.  I don't have one in my hands yet due to some logistics and I figured I'd wait until I did.   

[ICanFixThat]

I like the new layer index but i also like how it was a few weeks back. I would also like it so there was a lists of all Vics on the one page like the Wengers. ....

It was the old format, and Wenger will be changing to be like Victorinox when I'm finished tweaking the actual layer selection.

For technical reasons there is a link at the bottom of the home page to page containing a link to all the model sizes, basically a copy of the right hand menu on a page. 

I am considering if the extra work in maintaining the separate 'All Knives' page (one for Vic, and one for Wenger, never combined again) is worth it.  If others feel a 'All Knives' list (by manufacturer, no combining Vic and Wenger models) should be kept as well, feel free to voice your opinion in this thread.

[Neil]

I'd say the all knives list is pretty superfluous now.

[Cyclone82]

I just like how theres was one page with all the models as i found it easy to just scroll up and down to find what i wanted or i could easily search by name and ctrl + F

[AimlessWanderer]

... Another thing I'd LOVE to see, would be a hotlinked list in each of the tools descriptions as to what models they are on Could this be done? ...

You can do use the backlinks dropdown box at the top of each tool page to see all the pages that reference the tool.  The main problem with this is that they are not hot links, just a list, Wenger and Victorinox tools are mixed on the same page (that's likely to change in the not too distant future), sizes are mixed on a page (that is not likely to change).

Thank you! I hadn't picked up on that function

[Fisting_Chili]

Am I the only one who prefers option 3?

I like option 3 too.  It uses dead space on the right while still pulling the "Layer tools" and following content up on the page, so I might be able to see it all without having to scroll down.

Yes..I'm THAT lazy.

[Fisting_Chili]

I'd say the all knives list is pretty superfluous now.

You mean this one?
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Knife+List

I use this page all the time!

[ICanFixThat]

I'd say the all knives list is pretty superfluous now.

You mean this one?
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Knife+List

I use this page all the time!

That's right, it's deprecated.  It is no longer part of the current interface, and is not offcially being maintained.  At any time you could see that page inaccessible.

[Fisting_Chili]

I'd say the all knives list is pretty superfluous now.

You mean this one?
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Knife+List

I use this page all the time!

That's right, it's deprecated.  It is no longer part of the current interface, and is not offcially being maintained.  At any time you could see that page inaccessible.

  Sad for those like me that don't know all the models around, but need constant info.  Its easy for me to at least leaf through the various models when broken down by the size.

[ICanFixThat]

The Yes side of the poll is now pulling a head slightly, but not enough to make it a done deal yet.

---
In the extended discussion, one note on option 3, you have to look at several pages, sometimes there is a larger picture in that space where I located the TOC, and I like images there as they can tend to be larger than in the space next to the description. That would have to change if option 3 was implemented, so it,s not cut and dry. 

[gustophersmob]

Voted no, as I don't see it as being a problem, but do like option 3 the best if it is removed.

Just a thought, would it make sense to remove the TOC, but leave it on longer entries that may require a lot of scrolling?  I've seen that on other wikis, most notably wikipedia.