Talk:Miscellaneous ASH Features

I'm not sure how to handle that, since "script" neither needs or has its own page (it is, after all, meaningless without "notify"). I'm thinking the "script" page should just be a redirect to the heading on the "notify" page, but not listed.

Anyone with further thoughts, or other miscellaneous pseudo-functions, please chime in. --StDoodle (#1059825) 02:51, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree, since the notify and scripts are basicly one thing --Icon315 03:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

• I believe that script needs its own page because people find commands in scripts and look them up here. They should be able to believe that they can always do that. Therefore script needs its own page and should be referenced here even though it is always used in conjunction with notify. Naturally that connection should be highlighted on the page for script. --Bale 09:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  • script doesn't mean much outside of its use with notify; however, if the page exists, and redirects to a subheading on the notify page (as happens when you click on a data type on a function page), a user will go to the "right" spot, and search will work as intended, so this is what I'm leaning towards. --StDoodle (#1059825) 09:14, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  • A search for script will now be directed to information about the command so it satisfies me. --Bale 10:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

This is probably the best (or least-worst?) page to reference the "comments" page from as well (which only needs syntaxhighlight-tag-ification, really).--StDoodle (#1059825) 04:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

• Emphatically yes. Good point. --Bale 09:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Moved the discussion stuff to the talk page, 'cause... yeah. :P --StDoodle (#1059825) 08:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

There's no point in a ??? step if it isn't BEFORE profit. :( --StDoodle (#1059825) 00:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)