Content inventory link ID numbering conventions

21 May 2008 - 1:37am
6 years ago
9 replies
389 reads
Dante Murphy
2006

I always use 0.0 for the Home page. If there is another state of the home page (logged in, or admin user, etc.) I might use 0.1 or 0.2. Sometimes I will also give a global page a 0.x number, like Search Results, since this doesn't belong to any content category.

x.0 maps to a category page. Not all category pages have children.

x.x maps to a child page.

Most often, I will only go to a third level if there is a process embedded in a child page, like submitting a form or completing a purchase. On rare occasions I'll go to a third level page for really specific content; I haven't ever (to my recollection) gone to a fourth level.

When it comes time to wireframe each page, I might use letters to indicate different states or version of the same page.

I won't say this is the only way of doing things, but it hasn't faltered in years.

Dante

Comments

21 May 2008 - 5:38am
Anonymous

Thanks Dante,
it's always good to know which methods and variations have been
tried and tested!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=29259

21 May 2008 - 8:02am
Scott McDaniel
2007

I'm a bit green yet with actually producing this stuff myself, but
Dante's method
sounds like what I use.

However, I am finding myself at a loss on how to treat global details, such as
top navigation, footer, user login box, etc. when their level of
detail requires a
separate page.
Right now I have them listed as the 0.x pages, but that doesn't seem
quite on target, as they're not really subsections of (0.0) Home.

Scott

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Elizabeth wrote:
> Thanks Dante,
> it's always good to know which methods and variations have been
> tried and tested!

--
'Life' plus 'significance' = magic. ~ Grant Morrison

21 May 2008 - 11:50am
Dante Murphy
2006

Hey Scott-
I see what you're saying, but I don't think of "Home" as the root of
category 0.x, I think of "global" as the root and "Home" is the default
page for that category. If you think about it that way, then it makes
sense for login or search results to be 0.x. Not that you have to
adhere to my way of thinking, but that is my rationale for doing so. It
also makes the numbering concept more extensible, for instance to states
of embedded applications or desktop software, or to elements of a system
design.

Dante

Dante Murphy | Director of User Experience| D I G I T A S H E A L T H
229 South 18th Street | Rittenhouse Square | Philadelphia, PA 19103 |
USA
Email: dmurphy at digitashealth.com
www.digitashealth.com

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of
Scott McDaniel
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 9:03 AM
To: discuss at ixda.org
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Content inventory link ID numbering
conventions

I'm a bit green yet with actually producing this stuff myself, but
Dante's method
sounds like what I use.

However, I am finding myself at a loss on how to treat global details,
such as
top navigation, footer, user login box, etc. when their level of
detail requires a
separate page.
Right now I have them listed as the 0.x pages, but that doesn't seem
quite on target, as they're not really subsections of (0.0) Home.

Scott

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Elizabeth wrote:
> Thanks Dante,
> it's always good to know which methods and variations have been
> tried and tested!

--
'Life' plus 'significance' = magic. ~ Grant Morrison
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

21 May 2008 - 3:04pm
Anonymous

I do content inventories much the same way as Dante does, it sounds
like. The homepage is 0.0, the top-level category pages are 1.0, 2.0,
and so on, and pages below those are numbered as children. I've gone
as deep as five or six levels using this system, and it works fine,
even if it leads to some cumbersome numbers.

And on the same principle as the one Dante describes, where the root
of the site is a global 0, I number the utility navigation elements
(Contact Us, Sitemap, and the like) as 0.x. This applies even if
there are child pages underneath--so for example, if Contact Us is
page 0.2, department-specific contact pages underneath it would be
0.2.1, 0.2.2, etc.

I've tried out different approaches to numbering in content
inventories, and this one is the one that makes the most sense to
others who have to use the inventory.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=29259

21 May 2008 - 3:28pm
Anonymous

I do content inventories much the same way as Dante does, it sounds
like. The homepage is 0.0, the top-level category pages are 1.0, 2.0,
and so on, and pages below those are numbered as children. I've gone
as deep as five or six levels using this system, and it works fine,
even if it leads to some cumbersome numbers.

And on the same principle as the one Dante describes, where the root
of the site is a global 0, I number the utility navigation elements
(Contact Us, Sitemap, and the like) as 0.x. This applies even if
there are child pages underneath--so for example, if Contact Us is
page 0.2, department-specific contact pages underneath it would be
0.2.1, 0.2.2, etc.

I've tried out different approaches to numbering in content
inventories, and this one is the one that makes the most sense to
others who have to use the inventory.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=29259

21 May 2008 - 11:21pm
Oleg Krupnov
2008

This is an interesting discussion. Let me ask a naive question: why numbering
at all? What is the intended use of the numbers? If talking identification,
isn't it better to use other kinds of IDs e.g. HomePage, ContactUs etc.?
What happens if the hierarchy changes?
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Content-inventory-link-ID-numbering-conventions-tp17353145p17397086.html
Sent from the ixda.org - discussion list mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

21 May 2008 - 11:26pm
Scott McDaniel
2007

For things with which I've been involved, it was for ease reference -
("cf. 1.3") - and
because pages/sections/whatever tend to change more often, especially
now that I'm
working on a product which gets skinned by client specification, and
so names change
by project.

And yes, thanks for the responses!

Scott

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Oleg Krupnov <oleg.krupnov at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is an interesting discussion. Let me ask a naive question: why numbering
> at all? What is the intended use of the numbers? If talking identification,
> isn't it better to use other kinds of IDs e.g. HomePage, ContactUs etc.?
> What happens if the hierarchy changes?
> --

--
'Life' plus 'significance' = magic. ~ Grant Morrison

22 May 2008 - 10:01am
Dante Murphy
2006

Another reason is to map to templates or other design conventions, i.e.
all of section 1.x should have the blue header, or all x.0 pages use the
"Gallery" template. It also helps you quickly map a wireframe page back
into the site map.

Dante Murphy | Director of User Experience| D I G I T A S H E A L T H
229 South 18th Street | Rittenhouse Square | Philadelphia, PA 19103 |
USA
Email: dmurphy at digitashealth.com
www.digitashealth.com
-----Original Message-----

This is an interesting discussion. Let me ask a naive question: why
numbering at all? What is the intended use of the numbers?

23 May 2008 - 1:34am
Oleg Krupnov
2008

OK, and what if the hierarchy changes - you add/remove parent and child
pages. Do you renumber all pages in the project?
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Content-inventory-link-ID-numbering-conventions-tp17353145p17419481.html
Sent from the ixda.org - discussion list mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Syndicate content Get the feed