You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs-dev@perl.apache.org by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com> on 2002/07/01 10:56:04 UTC
RE: Breadcrumb
> I understand why it is like it is, but just couldn't help myself. I guess
> I just get too used to seeing things a given way and expect it to be
> universal.
>
> Not a big issue, so never mind.
Au contraire Bill...
I think this is an issue. Bill's key words here are "used to seeing things
a given way and expect it to be universal". Exactly. You and I, and no
doubt millions of others simply expect a breadcrumb trail to be complete.
By not making ours complete we are going to cause some confusion. I can
just see those emails flooding in to webmaster[at]perl.apache.org...
http://perl.apache.org/release/ is looking really neat now, so I understand
the groups reluctance to make any "major" changes at this late stage.
Personally, I can live with it as it is - but I do think you guys should
give it a little more thought (and yes, I know that long titles will make it
ugly - but there has to be a solution to that little problem, truncation
maybe...).
Kindest regards to all.
Jonathan M. Hollin
WYPUG
http://wypug.pm.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Breadcrumb
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Bill Moseley wrote:
> I assume that we will always have to truncate the level of the bread crumb
> at some nested level.
>
> So the difference is that
>
> http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/index.html
>
> shows the same bread crumb as
>
> http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
>
> but the first doesn't have mod_perl 1.0 User Guide as a link.
while the two URLs looks the same, they aren't. It's actually:
http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide
and
http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
when you look at it in this way everything perfectly fits in the
breadcrumb's logic.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Breadcrumb
Posted by Bill Moseley <mo...@hank.org>.
At 12:01 AM 07/02/02 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
>> Oh yeah, if that's all you want, I agree with that.
>
>I disagree. I've replied to this suggestion already with the reasoning
>why this is how it is and not the other way around.
We understand your reasoning, it's the viewing public's reasoning that's
the issue.
I'm sorry I brought it up. I'm at an advantage in some way as I've been
too busy to look at the site every day so when I do look at it I'm looking
at it as a newbie user. So things like breadcrumbs that work differently
than I expect jump right out.
Today I looked at it and it makes sense with the title that follows, but
others will find it different from what they first expect as a breadcrumb,
but (since we have a smart user base) they will quickly adapt. No doubt
that it makes sense to us the way it is.
If things always worked like they logically should then we would be using
betamax instead of VHS. (I don't have a DVD player yet.)
--
Bill Moseley
mailto:moseley@hank.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Breadcrumb
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
> At 17:09 01.07.2002, Bill Moseley wrote:
>
>> At 02:17 PM 07/01/02 +0100, Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
>> >> The truncating idea could work. Though we need to think about the
>> >> details: do we truncate the last element? and what if the previous
>> >> element was too long? not simple, eh? if you know how, please go
>> all the
>> >> way down rather just saying that this is wrong. we do know that
>> this is
>> >> "wrong" but we don't know "better".
>> >
>> >Okay. Truncating could be performed by a number of methods:
>>
>> I was not suggesting that they be any longer, but that they just show the
>> current page as a NON-link that is now shown as a link when you go one
>> more
>> level deep.
>>
>> I assume that we will always have to truncate the level of the bread
>> crumb
>> at some nested level.
>>
>> So the difference is that
>>
>> http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/index.html
>>
>> shows the same bread crumb as
>>
>> http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
>>
>> but the first doesn't have mod_perl 1.0 User Guide as a link.
>
>
> Oh yeah, if that's all you want, I agree with that.
I disagree. I've replied to this suggestion already with the reasoning
why this is how it is and not the other way around.
--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
At 17:09 01.07.2002, Bill Moseley wrote:
>At 02:17 PM 07/01/02 +0100, Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
> >> The truncating idea could work. Though we need to think about the
> >> details: do we truncate the last element? and what if the previous
> >> element was too long? not simple, eh? if you know how, please go all the
> >> way down rather just saying that this is wrong. we do know that this is
> >> "wrong" but we don't know "better".
> >
> >Okay. Truncating could be performed by a number of methods:
>
>I was not suggesting that they be any longer, but that they just show the
>current page as a NON-link that is now shown as a link when you go one more
>level deep.
>
>I assume that we will always have to truncate the level of the bread crumb
>at some nested level.
>
>So the difference is that
>
> http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/index.html
>
>shows the same bread crumb as
>
> http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
>
>but the first doesn't have mod_perl 1.0 User Guide as a link.
Oh yeah, if that's all you want, I agree with that.
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
> I was not suggesting that they be any longer, but that they just show the
> current page as a NON-link that is now shown as a link when you
> go one more
> level deep.
Bill I understood exactly what you meant - I just decided to pick up on that
one small point. :-)
> I agree we should be "standard", but I also think users of the mod_perl
> site can figure out the bread crumb.
I'm sure 99% of people would be able to "figure out the bread crumb", but
that's not the point when you talk about useability. To my mind users
shouldn't have to figure it out, it should be natural, intuitive... if you
notice the interface, or have to think about it - then it's wrong. The
interface should not get in the way of the content in any way.
But Bill I'm also a realist. The above describes a perfect world and I know
we have to compromise somewhere.
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Coordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by Bill Moseley <mo...@hank.org>.
At 02:17 PM 07/01/02 +0100, Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
>> The truncating idea could work. Though we need to think about the
>> details: do we truncate the last element? and what if the previous
>> element was too long? not simple, eh? if you know how, please go all the
>> way down rather just saying that this is wrong. we do know that this is
>> "wrong" but we don't know "better".
>
>Okay. Truncating could be performed by a number of methods:
I was not suggesting that they be any longer, but that they just show the
current page as a NON-link that is now shown as a link when you go one more
level deep.
I assume that we will always have to truncate the level of the bread crumb
at some nested level.
So the difference is that
http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/index.html
shows the same bread crumb as
http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
but the first doesn't have mod_perl 1.0 User Guide as a link.
Basically, I was thinking the bread crumb should end with at least the
current major section, sometimes as a link, sometimes not if deeper within
that section.
Adding "Getting Your Feet Wet" as a non-link on getwet.html would make it
complete, but not what I was thinking, and then that would be quite wide.
I agree we should be "standard", but I also think users of the mod_perl
site can figure out the bread crumb.
--
Bill Moseley
mailto:moseley@hank.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
> > I presume from these comments that the breadcrumb must not
> word-wrap onto a
> > new line?
>
> It's OK if this happens, but we better not. Try to insert a long title
> and see how it works.
It's not good - any more than one line and the layout is going to be
disturbed. I don't need to test to see that. :-)
> Currently we already have the concept of title and stitle attributes,
> because we have a more prominent problem with the menu. So the menu uses
> stitle (short title). But these two are available only for index.html
> pages (think docset titles), leaf document have only the title attribute:
>
> html: <title>...</title>
> pod: =head1 NAME
I see. So we are at the authors mercy! Yikes...
> ok. this is only for the leaf nodes, right? the index.html pages don't
> need this terminator.
That's a tricky one Stas. If you're going to do it properly then even the
index pages should have the stub. Consider again the point of the
breadcrumb: to visually represent your current position in a heirarchical
information space - well, if you exclude the stub <i>anywhere</i> then the
representation is wrong.
I think, if you're going to exclude the stub from index pages then you must
exclude from all documents. Otherwise you have two conflicting models and
the user is going to more confused than if we just omit the stubs
altogether.
> >>I have another idea: use the real filenames. Assuming that the filenames
> >>are descriptive (which I think is the case) this will work well and
> >>filenames are already short enough.
> >
> >
> > If this were any other site but mod_perl, then I say no to this straight
> > away as the filenames will be meaningless to most users.
> However, I think
> > it's safe to assume that our audience is a little bit more
> savvy. Even so,
> > I think filenames are a little "off" - not quite what we are looking for
> > IMHO.
>
> On the second thought we already have the URL with real filenames. So
> it's probably not a good idea to duplicate this concept.
Good point - I'd forgotten that.
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Coordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Breadcrumb
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
>>that requires a lot of heuristics, because you have to take into account
>>the overall length, where the number of sections varies. So you need to
>>backtrace, see what you can cut, go forward backtrace again, etc. Not a
>>job for the templates logic.
>>
>>But the biggest problem is that you don't know what's the font
>>size/family is used by the client, so you cannot really know how many
>>chars is ok.
>
>
> I presume from these comments that the breadcrumb must not word-wrap onto a
> new line?
It's OK if this happens, but we better not. Try to insert a long title
and see how it works.
>>>2) Remove "stop words" (the, and, of, etc) from the title,
>>
>>then truncate to
>>
>>>character x (so "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding
>>
>>guidelines" could
>>
>>>become "CGI mod_perl porting", etc)
>>>
>>>3) Remove any words not beginning with a capital letter (i.e. minor
>>>words) - "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding guidelines"
>>
>>becomes "CGI
>>
>>>Porting Coding". Now, I agree, this is a terrible title - but
>>
>>only because
>>
>>>the title of the document itself is poorly constructed...
>>
>>These two doesn't sound like very good ones, authors will forget to
>>Upcase some words in titles, certain titles won't make sense without the
>>articles.
>
>
> So there will be no editing? Is there anyplace where a "breadcrumb title"
> can be explicitely defined?
Currently we already have the concept of title and stitle attributes,
because we have a more prominent problem with the menu. So the menu uses
stitle (short title). But these two are available only for index.html
pages (think docset titles), leaf document have only the title attribute:
html: <title>...</title>
pod: =head1 NAME
>>>Good idea. You could replace "..." with "current page",
>>
>>"current document",
>>
>>>"this page", etc, etc.
>>
>>I prefer "this page" or "..."
>
>
> I prefer "this page" I must admit.
ok. this is only for the leaf nodes, right? the index.html pages don't
need this terminator.
>>I have another idea: use the real filenames. Assuming that the filenames
>>are descriptive (which I think is the case) this will work well and
>>filenames are already short enough.
>
>
> If this were any other site but mod_perl, then I say no to this straight
> away as the filenames will be meaningless to most users. However, I think
> it's safe to assume that our audience is a little bit more savvy. Even so,
> I think filenames are a little "off" - not quite what we are looking for
> IMHO.
On the second thought we already have the URL with real filenames. So
it's probably not a good idea to duplicate this concept.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
> that requires a lot of heuristics, because you have to take into account
> the overall length, where the number of sections varies. So you need to
> backtrace, see what you can cut, go forward backtrace again, etc. Not a
> job for the templates logic.
>
> But the biggest problem is that you don't know what's the font
> size/family is used by the client, so you cannot really know how many
> chars is ok.
I presume from these comments that the breadcrumb must not word-wrap onto a
new line?
> > 2) Remove "stop words" (the, and, of, etc) from the title,
> then truncate to
> > character x (so "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding
> guidelines" could
> > become "CGI mod_perl porting", etc)
> >
> > 3) Remove any words not beginning with a capital letter (i.e. minor
> > words) - "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding guidelines"
> becomes "CGI
> > Porting Coding". Now, I agree, this is a terrible title - but
> only because
> > the title of the document itself is poorly constructed...
>
> These two doesn't sound like very good ones, authors will forget to
> Upcase some words in titles, certain titles won't make sense without the
> articles.
So there will be no editing? Is there anyplace where a "breadcrumb title"
can be explicitely defined?
> > Good idea. You could replace "..." with "current page",
> "current document",
> > "this page", etc, etc.
>
> I prefer "this page" or "..."
I prefer "this page" I must admit.
> I have another idea: use the real filenames. Assuming that the filenames
> are descriptive (which I think is the case) this will work well and
> filenames are already short enough.
If this were any other site but mod_perl, then I say no to this straight
away as the filenames will be meaningless to most users. However, I think
it's safe to assume that our audience is a little bit more savvy. Even so,
I think filenames are a little "off" - not quite what we are looking for
IMHO.
Per Einar: Have you any objections to "this page"?
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Coordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Breadcrumb
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
>>The truncating idea could work. Though we need to think about the
>>details: do we truncate the last element? and what if the previous
>>element was too long? not simple, eh? if you know how, please go all the
>>way down rather just saying that this is wrong. we do know that this is
>>"wrong" but we don't know "better".
>
>
> Okay. Truncating could be performed by a number of methods:
>
> 1) Cut at characted x then append "..." (you see this in the description
> part of the results of some search engines - like on WYPUG for instance)
that requires a lot of heuristics, because you have to take into account
the overall length, where the number of sections varies. So you need to
backtrace, see what you can cut, go forward backtrace again, etc. Not a
job for the templates logic.
But the biggest problem is that you don't know what's the font
size/family is used by the client, so you cannot really know how many
chars is ok.
> 2) Remove "stop words" (the, and, of, etc) from the title, then truncate to
> character x (so "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding guidelines" could
> become "CGI mod_perl porting", etc)
>
> 3) Remove any words not beginning with a capital letter (i.e. minor
> words) - "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding guidelines" becomes "CGI
> Porting Coding". Now, I agree, this is a terrible title - but only because
> the title of the document itself is poorly constructed...
These two doesn't sound like very good ones, authors will forget to
Upcase some words in titles, certain titles won't make sense without the
articles.
>>another problem is that the title is going to be duplicated, is that OK
>>by your usability intuition, Jonathan?
>
>
> Yes, absolutely. Remember that these are two different things - document
> title and a "roadmap". The duplication is in fact necessary to relate the
> two IMHO. Reduce the size of the breadcrumb font and there's no reason why
> it should be intrusive. Of course, this assumes, again, that the document
> titles are well-formed.
ok
>>I've another idea, what if instead of showing the title of the leaf
>>node, we just use '...' implying that there is more? consider:
>>
>>Home / Documentation / mod_perl 1.0 User Guide / ...
>>
>>for the URL:
>>http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
>>
>>so we do tell the user that there is more without saying it.
>
>
> Good idea. You could replace "..." with "current page", "current document",
> "this page", etc, etc.
I prefer "this page" or "..."
I have another idea: use the real filenames. Assuming that the filenames
are descriptive (which I think is the case) this will work well and
filenames are already short enough.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
> The truncating idea could work. Though we need to think about the
> details: do we truncate the last element? and what if the previous
> element was too long? not simple, eh? if you know how, please go all the
> way down rather just saying that this is wrong. we do know that this is
> "wrong" but we don't know "better".
Okay. Truncating could be performed by a number of methods:
1) Cut at characted x then append "..." (you see this in the description
part of the results of some search engines - like on WYPUG for instance)
2) Remove "stop words" (the, and, of, etc) from the title, then truncate to
character x (so "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding guidelines" could
become "CGI mod_perl porting", etc)
3) Remove any words not beginning with a capital letter (i.e. minor
words) - "CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding guidelines" becomes "CGI
Porting Coding". Now, I agree, this is a terrible title - but only because
the title of the document itself is poorly constructed...
> another problem is that the title is going to be duplicated, is that OK
> by your usability intuition, Jonathan?
Yes, absolutely. Remember that these are two different things - document
title and a "roadmap". The duplication is in fact necessary to relate the
two IMHO. Reduce the size of the breadcrumb font and there's no reason why
it should be intrusive. Of course, this assumes, again, that the document
titles are well-formed.
> I've another idea, what if instead of showing the title of the leaf
> node, we just use '...' implying that there is more? consider:
>
> Home / Documentation / mod_perl 1.0 User Guide / ...
>
> for the URL:
> http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
>
> so we do tell the user that there is more without saying it.
Good idea. You could replace "..." with "current page", "current document",
"this page", etc, etc.
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Coordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Breadcrumb
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
>>We don't have to look like everyone else. The breadcrumb *is* complete,
>>when you look over 2 lines. The title is bigger and draws more attention.
>>Personally, I wouldn't like it any other way.
>
>
> Granted Per Einar. That's not quite what I was suggesting. You have to
> understand that I have a background in interface design and useability
> studies and this influences my perspective... now if you have a breadcrumb
> trail (which is, thankfully, becoming standard fare on the web now) then
> yours should work the same as the de-facto standard. If it doesn't, then
> users have to relearn when they visit your website and that is really BAD!
The truncating idea could work. Though we need to think about the
details: do we truncate the last element? and what if the previous
element was too long? not simple, eh? if you know how, please go all the
way down rather just saying that this is wrong. we do know that this is
"wrong" but we don't know "better".
another problem is that the title is going to be duplicated, is that OK
by your usability intuition, Jonathan?
I've another idea, what if instead of showing the title of the leaf
node, we just use '...' implying that there is more? consider:
Home / Documentation / mod_perl 1.0 User Guide / ...
for the URL:
http://perl.apache.org/release/docs/1.0/guide/getwet.html
so we do tell the user that there is more without saying it.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
> We don't have to look like everyone else. The breadcrumb *is* complete,
> when you look over 2 lines. The title is bigger and draws more attention.
> Personally, I wouldn't like it any other way.
Granted Per Einar. That's not quite what I was suggesting. You have to
understand that I have a background in interface design and useability
studies and this influences my perspective... now if you have a breadcrumb
trail (which is, thankfully, becoming standard fare on the web now) then
yours should work the same as the de-facto standard. If it doesn't, then
users have to relearn when they visit your website and that is really BAD!
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Coordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
RE: Breadcrumb
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
At 10:56 01.07.2002, Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
> > I understand why it is like it is, but just couldn't help myself. I guess
> > I just get too used to seeing things a given way and expect it to be
> > universal.
> >
> > Not a big issue, so never mind.
>
>Au contraire Bill...
>
>I think this is an issue. Bill's key words here are "used to seeing things
>a given way and expect it to be universal". Exactly. You and I, and no
>doubt millions of others simply expect a breadcrumb trail to be complete.
>By not making ours complete we are going to cause some confusion. I can
>just see those emails flooding in to webmaster[at]perl.apache.org...
We don't have to look like everyone else. The breadcrumb *is* complete,
when you look over 2 lines. The title is bigger and draws more attention.
Personally, I wouldn't like it any other way.
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org