Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Chaos"
From Computer History Wiki
m (→Protocol versus hardware: fix link) |
(Chaos protocol hardware aren't really fundamentally connected) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Protocol versus hardware== | ==Protocol versus hardware== | ||
| − | The header for this category says it's for 'Chaos protocol' stuff, not | + | The header for this category says it's for 'Chaos protocol' stuff, not Chaosnet hardware; but [[Chaosnet interface]] just got put here? I am thinking of re-naming this one to 'Chaos Protocol'; and also maybe setting up a new 'Chaosnet Hardware' category? |
I had previously [[Talk:Chaosnet#Chaos hardware and protocol|explored]] the possibility of splitting the [[Chaosnet]] article into separate 'Chaos protocol' and 'Chaos hardware' articles, but I had decided not to, because some of the content, like the early history, would not easily split (so either it would have to be duplicated, or moved into a ''third'' article). Maybe we should just bite the bullet and split it? [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 16:10, 30 July 2024 (CEST) | I had previously [[Talk:Chaosnet#Chaos hardware and protocol|explored]] the possibility of splitting the [[Chaosnet]] article into separate 'Chaos protocol' and 'Chaos hardware' articles, but I had decided not to, because some of the content, like the early history, would not easily split (so either it would have to be duplicated, or moved into a ''third'' article). Maybe we should just bite the bullet and split it? [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 16:10, 30 July 2024 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : I didn't think the single category was crowded enough to warrant splitting it in two, but sure, I suppose it can't hurt. | ||
| + | |||
| + | :: The issue is not the size, it's just that I'm trying to encourage a clear distinction been the Chaos protocol, and Chaosnet hardware, which aren't really fundamentally connected (the hardware went out of popularity pretty quickly, but the protocol hung on for quite a while, without the hardware). | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Any chance it can be 'Chaosnet Protocol'? [[User:Larsbrinkhoff|Larsbrinkhoff]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 1 August 2024 | ||
| + | |||
| + | :: I will have to do some research on that. I had started nudging in the direction of the split, here, by using ' ''Chaos'' protocol' and ' ''Chaosnet'' hardware', so that we could use the short forms ('Chaos' and 'Chaosnet') without any ambiguity. Let me look though all the contemporary documentation and see if 'Chaosnet' was ever used of the protocol. Until I have managed to figure that out, I will leave all the protocol-related articles where they are, and only move Chaosnet hardware-related things to a new [[:Category:Chaosnet Hardware]]. [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 23:26, 1 August 2024 (CEST) | ||
Latest revision as of 00:21, 3 August 2024
Protocol versus hardware
The header for this category says it's for 'Chaos protocol' stuff, not Chaosnet hardware; but Chaosnet interface just got put here? I am thinking of re-naming this one to 'Chaos Protocol'; and also maybe setting up a new 'Chaosnet Hardware' category?
I had previously explored the possibility of splitting the Chaosnet article into separate 'Chaos protocol' and 'Chaos hardware' articles, but I had decided not to, because some of the content, like the early history, would not easily split (so either it would have to be duplicated, or moved into a third article). Maybe we should just bite the bullet and split it? Jnc (talk) 16:10, 30 July 2024 (CEST)
- I didn't think the single category was crowded enough to warrant splitting it in two, but sure, I suppose it can't hurt.
- The issue is not the size, it's just that I'm trying to encourage a clear distinction been the Chaos protocol, and Chaosnet hardware, which aren't really fundamentally connected (the hardware went out of popularity pretty quickly, but the protocol hung on for quite a while, without the hardware).
- Any chance it can be 'Chaosnet Protocol'? Larsbrinkhoff (talk) 1 August 2024
- I will have to do some research on that. I had started nudging in the direction of the split, here, by using ' Chaos protocol' and ' Chaosnet hardware', so that we could use the short forms ('Chaos' and 'Chaosnet') without any ambiguity. Let me look though all the contemporary documentation and see if 'Chaosnet' was ever used of the protocol. Until I have managed to figure that out, I will leave all the protocol-related articles where they are, and only move Chaosnet hardware-related things to a new Category:Chaosnet Hardware. Jnc (talk) 23:26, 1 August 2024 (CEST)
