Mike Rylander schrieb:
>
>> Mike Rylander wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> Again, who does it, and why not?
>> >> >
>
>
> If you're going to complain about something not being there, let's
> quote the entire block of text, eh?
>
You misunderstood. No offense was meant. I was not complaining that
Evergreen doesn't have a certain feature. You said it does indexes
and I couldn't find them. More likely I misunderstood you - nothing
happens easier with list postings.
>
> Look, I'm as guilty as anyone about having pet features, but we all
> need to be careful when saying X or Y does or doesn't do Z, because
> there may never have been a claim of such. And always remember the
> sage wisdom of one (according to the #code4lib IRC channel bot, in any
> case) David Fiander, "Working code always wins."
>
And I wasn't saying Evergreen isn't winning, to the contrary: I was
saying that browsable indexes are probably unnecessary. How else could
Evergreen be winning, not having them? How could I blame Evergreen
for not having something I proposed for NG catalogs when it isn't one.
(There's none around yet or this list wouldn't exist.)
> However, I will follow your track off course if you like. If you
> search for "asdflkjdfqw" in Google, or any library catalog, you will
> never get any results -- including a USEFUL browse list.
Sure, but Google doesn't give you a useful suggestion for *every*
mistake you make, and its suggestions are sometimes plain silly.
But I liked to think that displaying an a-z index at the
position where your term should be sitting, that might just
sometimes be helpful. Which led me to think it might be a useful
feature of NG catalogs. Lack of support in this forum seems to
indicate otherwise. So be it, to the relief of all those SQLers
out there who can never figure it out and who seem to think that
"No results found" or whatever is good enough.
B. Eversberg
Received on Mon Jun 26 2006 - 07:28:40 EDT