Redundancies: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Anarchitect (talk | contribs) experessing my pattern namespace confusion |
Anarchitect (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I just created the article [[Patterns:Dynamic_Queries]], because it was linked from the design patterns page as not being there yet. Then i discovered, it was just not there in the Pattern namespace, but in the global namespace there is an elaborate page on DQ. Should there be really duplicate pages for things that could be regarded being concepts, techniques, and design pattern at the same time? Where would dynamic queries fit? I am grateful for any enlightening hints. I would argue having not special namespaces for concepts, techniques, or design patterns, but just categories. [[User:Anarchitect|Anarchitect]] 13:39, 22 April 2008 (CEST) | I just created the article [[Patterns:Dynamic_Queries]], because it was linked from the design patterns page as not being there yet. Then i discovered, it was just not there in the Pattern namespace, but in the global namespace there is an elaborate page on DQ. Should there be really duplicate pages for things that could be regarded being concepts, techniques, and design pattern at the same time? Where would dynamic queries fit? I am grateful for any enlightening hints. I would argue having not special namespaces for concepts, techniques, or design patterns, but just categories. [[User:Anarchitect|Anarchitect]] 13:39, 22 April 2008 (CEST) | ||
[[Category:Coffee Room]] | |||
Revision as of 12:40, 22 April 2008
I just created the article Patterns:Dynamic_Queries, because it was linked from the design patterns page as not being there yet. Then i discovered, it was just not there in the Pattern namespace, but in the global namespace there is an elaborate page on DQ. Should there be really duplicate pages for things that could be regarded being concepts, techniques, and design pattern at the same time? Where would dynamic queries fit? I am grateful for any enlightening hints. I would argue having not special namespaces for concepts, techniques, or design patterns, but just categories. Anarchitect 13:39, 22 April 2008 (CEST)