Closed Bug 350534 Opened 18 years ago Closed 16 years ago

Cleaning, removing many files in http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/

Categories

(www.mozilla.org :: General, defect)

Product:
www.mozilla.org
Component:
General
Platform:
x86
Windows XP
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
VERIFIED FIXED

People

(Reporter: bugzilla, Unassigned)

References

(
URL
)

Details

Description:
------------
After examining attachment 210868 [details] from bug 151557 and because Mozilla Developer Center has becomed more established, I believe and suggest we remove all the files in

http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/html40/

and

http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/xbdhtml/

Explanations:
-------------
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/html40/index.htm (start of the slides)
and all
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/html40/*
are about novelties in HTML 4. These slides were written as 
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
   <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; I) [Netscape]">

http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/xbdhtml/index.htm
is the start of the slides and discuss support for Navigator 4+ and Internet Explorer 3+ and Nav5+

Expected results:
-----------------
1- Mozilla.org should only keep

http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/html40.zip (171 KB)
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/xbdhtml.zip (398 KB)

and to keep these 2 files in an "archives" directory somewhere.

2- all other files (*.htm, *.js, *.txt, *.gif and sub-directories) from these 2 directories (codestock99/html40/ , codestock99/xbdhtml/) should be removed, deleted.
If we're keeping around the zip files, I don't see why we shouldn't keep them accessible as HTML as well. Slideshows are always dated, just like news articles. They reflect the status of whatever at the time the presentation was given. I wouldn't mind putting them in a slideshow archive though. I think mozilla.org could really use one of those in general -- some place everyone could contribute their Mozilla-related slide shows.
> If we're keeping around the zip files, I don't see why we shouldn't keep them
> accessible as HTML as well. 

My reasoning was that the files are so outdated that they refer to non-existent references too:
{
All properties: http://style.webreview.com/mastergrid.html

"Safe" properties: http://style.webreview.com/safegrid.html

"Unsafe" properties: http://style.webreview.com/

http://developer.netscape.com/docs/examples/index.html?content=javascript/browser_type.html

http://developer.netscape.com/docs/technote/index.html?content=dynhtml/csspapi/csspapi.html

etc.
}

The codestock99/ slideshow examples and explanations specifically refer to NS4 and IE4, with code that is invalid code now, with non-W3C-compliant code, and some pages refer to problems with Nav2, Nav3, IE3+.

> Slideshows are always dated, just like news
> articles. They reflect the status of whatever at the time the presentation was
> given. I wouldn't mind putting them in a slideshow archive though. I think
> mozilla.org could really use one of those in general -- some place everyone
> could contribute their Mozilla-related slide shows.
 

codestock99/ files are way too old for archiving, I'd say. The zipping suggestion is just a safe compromise between entire codestock99/ file archiving and entire codestock99/file deletion. Anyways, whatever, the minimum would be to move them to some sort of archive/graveyard directory.

I just hope mozilla.org can arrive to a coherent, consistent approach to outdated documents, not just codestock99/ files.
Marking this bug as dependent of bug 345664
Depends on: mozilla.org
For fans of this bug, I added 
Slides from CodeStock '99
to the list of docs to archive at
Mozilla.org:Archiving Suggestions: /docs
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla.org:Archiving_Suggestions#docs.2F
Product: mozilla.org → Websites
The whole directory was removed 2008-07-31 16:09 (and 16:10) PDT.

Cursory review of http://www-archive.mozilla.org/docs/codestock99/ shows it's still there in case anyone wants to resurrect parts for one of the wikis.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Jeremy, 

I'm happy that codestock99 has been removed from the normal, more usual www.mozilla.org and has been moved to www-archive.mozilla.org. I believe this is the consequence of actions taken in bug 446213. Nevertheless,

Marking as VERIFIED
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Blocks: 656840
Component: www.mozilla.org → General
Product: Websites → www.mozilla.org
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.