thomasbliss
Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2003
- Messages
- 68
what does @ next to a listing signify? and is it something submitters to the dmoz need to be aware of?
Thank you.
Thomas
Thank you.
Thomas
what does @ next to a listing signify?
- Thread starter thomasbliss
- Start date
donaldb
Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Messages
- 5,146
Are you talking about the @ next to a category name? We call that an @Link. In the world of Unix it is known as a symlink. It points to categories that could serve as subcategories of the category, but it is in a different part of the directory. There is a better explanation in the guidelines 
If you mouse over one you will see that they often point to completely different, but related branches.
If you mouse over one you will see that they often point to completely different, but related branches.thomasbliss
Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2003
- Messages
- 68
I saw a listing i.e. Cleese, John@ (6)
That was what I was referring. Is that @ something an editor added or was it added by the submitter?
Thanks
Thomas
That was what I was referring. Is that @ something an editor added or was it added by the submitter?
Thanks
Thomas
If you click on Cleese,_John@ you will be taken to the John Cleese category wherever that resides in the directory (not a specific site listing). Reread donaldb's explanation above.
>> ...is it something submitters to the dmoz need to be aware of?
Not really. Let's say you run a John Cleese web site but are looking to submit it in the Monty Python category -- the presence of the John Cleese @link there tells you you should really be submitting your John Cleese site there, not to the Monty Python category.
>> ...is it something submitters to the dmoz need to be aware of?
Not really. Let's say you run a John Cleese web site but are looking to submit it in the Monty Python category -- the presence of the John Cleese @link there tells you you should really be submitting your John Cleese site there, not to the Monty Python category.
thomasbliss
Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2003
- Messages
- 68
Thank you....
Thomas
Thomas
A
AuntieBeeb
@ sign makes navigation very confusing
I thought the only reason for the public display of the @ sign was to confuse users?!
For example -
Top > Society > Politics
By Country (0)
By Region (1)
will be read by most users as meaning the "Country" category has zero links, while "By Region" has one link.
Niether of these are true, but how is the user to know that?
It serves no useful purpose and should be dropped.
Something that should be added is the closing tag for the list element </li> which is missing from the dmoz site and datafeed. Without that closing tag it's not possible to produce valid (x)html.
Both these changes would enhance the usability of the otherwise excellent DMOZ.
I thought the only reason for the public display of the @ sign was to confuse users?!
For example -
Top > Society > Politics
By Country (0)
By Region (1)
will be read by most users as meaning the "Country" category has zero links, while "By Region" has one link.
Niether of these are true, but how is the user to know that?
It serves no useful purpose and should be dropped.
Something that should be added is the closing tag for the list element </li> which is missing from the dmoz site and datafeed. Without that closing tag it's not possible to produce valid (x)html.
Both these changes would enhance the usability of the otherwise excellent DMOZ.
Re: @ sign makes navigation very confusing
Is it just the @ sign you object to or the linked categories?
Symlinks to categories aren't likely going to be going anywhere anytime soon, though who knows, maybe the counts will be included some day or we'll decide on a better way to display them.
Is it just the @ sign you object to or the linked categories?
Symlinks to categories aren't likely going to be going anywhere anytime soon, though who knows, maybe the counts will be included some day or we'll decide on a better way to display them.
Re: @ sign makes navigation very confusing
The ODP software treats category links (symlinks, relcats, and altlangs) and listed sites as different things. The counts indicated in parentheses represents a total of all listed sites in that category and subcategories below it. We can't include the count of sites in linked categories (or just symlinks), because you would end up with infinite loops of counting since the category structure is so interrelated. We've discussed just counting the symlink as a link so that the @link farms don't look empty, but that can cause confusion elsewhere when counts include a mix of sites and links.
We'd like to change it somehow, but just haven't come up with an implementable good solution.
Those (0)s bug us too.
The ODP software treats category links (symlinks, relcats, and altlangs) and listed sites as different things. The counts indicated in parentheses represents a total of all listed sites in that category and subcategories below it. We can't include the count of sites in linked categories (or just symlinks), because you would end up with infinite loops of counting since the category structure is so interrelated. We've discussed just counting the symlink as a link so that the @link farms don't look empty, but that can cause confusion elsewhere when counts include a mix of sites and links.
We'd like to change it somehow, but just haven't come up with an implementable good solution.
totalxsive
Member
Re: @ sign makes navigation very confusing
Some of our downstream data users, like Google, do display the number of sites instead of (0). I think Yahoo does to, but they obviously don't use our data.
Some of our downstream data users, like Google, do display the number of sites instead of (0). I think Yahoo does to, but they obviously don't use our data
.Re: @ sign makes navigation very confusing
1) Google provides no visible clue to differentiate true subcategories from @links ("at-links", virtual categories located someplace else)
2) Google counts each @link and each true subdirectory as 1. ODP counts them as zero. Both add the contents of true subirectories into the total count, and neither add the contents at the other end of @links into the true count.
Compare:
http://dmoz.org/Business/Financial_Services/Insurance/By_Region/
http://directory.google.com/Top/Business/Financial_Services/Insurance/By_Region/
I prefer the Google counting method because, as Lissa said, "those (0)s bug us too". But I prefer the differentiating at ODP between true subcategories and @links, as well as its "sort priority", which allows the set of @links and subcatogories to be sorted into up to three logically-distinct groupings.
That is not precise. The difference between Google counts and ODP counts are two:
1) Google provides no visible clue to differentiate true subcategories from @links ("at-links", virtual categories located someplace else)
2) Google counts each @link and each true subdirectory as 1. ODP counts them as zero. Both add the contents of true subirectories into the total count, and neither add the contents at the other end of @links into the true count.
Compare:
http://dmoz.org/Business/Financial_Services/Insurance/By_Region/
http://directory.google.com/Top/Business/Financial_Services/Insurance/By_Region/
I prefer the Google counting method because, as Lissa said, "those (0)s bug us too". But I prefer the differentiating at ODP between true subcategories and @links, as well as its "sort priority", which allows the set of @links and subcatogories to be sorted into up to three logically-distinct groupings.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2002
- Messages
- 9,204
Re: @ sign makes navigation very confusing
Just in short, because we have that counting discussion very often:
Counting links in @linked categories is fairly simple when you have a static image of the ODP like google has, but extremely complicated when you have live data which changes permanently. The problems have been discussed in the internal forums quite often, so there is no need to address them in detail again.
And to be honest: There is not much likeliness that the current system will change soon.
Just in short, because we have that counting discussion very often:
Counting links in @linked categories is fairly simple when you have a static image of the ODP like google has, but extremely complicated when you have live data which changes permanently. The problems have been discussed in the internal forums quite often, so there is no need to address them in detail again.
And to be honest: There is not much likeliness that the current system will change soon.