User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20130515224647/@comment-7302713-20130517045433

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20130515224647/@comment-7302713-20130517045433 I posited the question a week ago on the previous thread and never received a response.

And a large part of my question about the tabs is in regard to linking. There are two arguments made against tabbing--one was that nesting was harder on editors but the larger argument seemed to be that it would be to hard for editors to link directly to the different pages. If we tabbed, then I don't see why we have to link to a particular tab. It's all there together and super easy to navigate (if we don't tab, I think we do need to direct link). I don't understand why something that made linking to hard for editors a couple weeks ago is now not a problem. Czech is also presenting this set-up as not just important for the reader of the day of the year page, but also as important in terms of links. I don't understand that argument, I don't know where it's coming from and the flip-flopping on this position has me confused, in large part because I don't know what's propelling these opinions. This is being presented as helpful for transmat, but it's not explaining what these new transmat pages are.

I'm trying to understand why the idea behind this has changed so drastically.

Also, my opinion of this subject changes depending on how it's formatted. I'm not necessarily in favour of this without tabs, so how it's formatted seems to me to be an important part of the discussion. At the very least, it needs to be understood that my opinion in favour of this, at least at this point, is dependent on formatting.