This is not a fully baked idea, so bear with me. Instead of using regex, what 
if we use search techniques to locate the page user wants to look at. If I'm 
currently looking at mxnet.ndarray.convolution operator in master, take me to 
the same operator API in 1.2.1, regardless of whether it is in a similar page 
or whether we decided to re-organize API pages and create a page just for 
convolution. Likewise for tutorials (i.e. find the tutorial that best matches 
the content I'm looking at, even if it's been renamed or moved around). I feel 
like it can be a great internship project. - Sina

On 9/18/18, 5:08 PM, "Aaron Markham" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hello dev list!
    
    I've been doing a bit with .htaccess redirects on the site to get us things
    like custom 404s and redirecting google searches that come in on outdated
    material. That's working pretty well because the redirects are simple.
    
    I need help though. I've written a short proposal on how I think the UX for
    API docs and tutorials should work. I'm not trying a major jump here. This
    is a small amount of change for a better experience.
    For example, right now, if you're browsing API docs for 1.3.0 and want to
    see the master version, you would hit the dropdown and select master. Then
    you get taken to the home page for master and have to go find the document
    again. (It's always done this.) It should stay on that document, but give
    the latest version. Or for tutorials, if you request a really old, likely
    broken tutorial because it happens to show up in google search results, the
    site should kindly escort you to the latest, tested tutorial.
    
    mod_rewrite and .htaccess can do this, but it requires regex skills that I
    lack. I've tried hundreds of variations now, and would like some guidance.
    
    Here's the proposal and my notes:
    
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Version+calls+and+redirects+for+Tutorials+and+API+documents
    
    I appreciate your help with this!
    
    Cheers,
    Aaron
    


Reply via email to