Symphony.

As far a I understand the new website’s extension area, each extension has its own homepage presenting a description, a screenshot, a compatibility chart, an issue tracker and a link to the repository and the related forum discussion.

Is there a specific reason why the links seem to point to a download instead of an extension overview:

http://www.getsymphony.com/download/extensions/view/20466/

I’d expect something like this for the same extension:

http://www.getsymphony.com/extensions/nils/mediathek

While the first link is hard to remember and represents more than a download link, the second represents both the extension developer and the extension name. This way these links could really be suitable as main extension homepage.

P. S.: Links like http://www.getsymphony.com/extensions/nils/mediathek/repository/ and http://www.getsymphony.com/extensions/nils/mediathek/discussion/ could be used to redirect to the related areas and would make the links much more readable and usable.

I suppose the “download” part of the URL isn’t the verb “download” but represents the fact that the Extensions part of the site lives under the “Download” label in the primary nav.

For URL semantics the “Download” (verb) would be renamed “Downloads” (noun) so that URLs refer to the noun not the verb. However the primary navigation is verb-led, so this would break consistency.

I can see why the URL structure of extensions are as they are. I don’t think they should be attributed to a member name in the URL. Extensions can have multiple authors, and change authors during their lifetime (the Publish Filtering extension for example).

Indeed, using the ID in the URL establishes a definite permalink to the extension. If the handle were used and its name changes in the future (no matter how small the change) all links would be broken.

Perhaps we could include but ignore the handle as part of the permalink URL for extensions?

http://getsymphony.com/download/extensions/view/20466/mediathek/

Also, I think it’s fairly unlikely that extension names will change.

During the last years URLs have changed four times: We had symphony21.com/forum, we had getsymphony.com/forum, we had getsymphony.com/community and we now have getsymphony.com/discuss. This illustrates that if things change, URLs will also change. If everything is well planned, you’ll have redirects for visitors.

So for me it’s not an argument that the links might possibly change (they will of course from time to time). My problem is, that IDs are great in theory (“they won’t change”). But they are made for computers – and humans are no machines. How should I remember if 20466 is the Mediathek id – or was it 20644 or 24066?

I just believe that the current links are not a good solution if they should represent the extension’s homes. These links should be easy to understand and easy to keep in mind. The current ones are not. I’m not saying my proposition is the best, but I think it’s easier for the users.