Skip to content

Demo: URL and Section Structure

This page compares the current public shape with a more intentionally curated alternative. It is not a migration plan. It is a quick way to see whether the current paths feel good enough or whether you want a cleanup pass.

Current Public Shape

Examples from the live site:

  • /navigation/nav2-architecture-and-tuning-guide/
  • /navigation/nav2-controller-selection-guide/
  • /navigation/rviz-goals-bt-navigator-and-nav2-flow/
  • /foundations/urdf-as-a-frame-translation-system/
  • /devops/simulation-testing-and-deployment-for-ros2/

What this gives you:

  • low migration cost
  • article files map directly to public URLs
  • simple editorial workflow

What it costs:

  • some slugs are long and book-title-like
  • some section names are broad internal buckets rather than the cleanest public IA
  • readers do not always get an obvious sense of subsection structure

More Pleasant Docs-Site Structure

Possible public reshaping:

  • /navigation/nav2/
  • /navigation/controllers/
  • /navigation/planners/
  • /navigation/recoveries/
  • /robot-modeling/urdf-frames/
  • /robot-modeling/urdf-structure/
  • /operations/simulation/
  • /operations/workspaces/

Possible section reshaping:

  • Core ROS 2
  • Robot Modeling and Frames
  • Navigation and Autonomy
  • Sensors and Perception
  • Robot Hardware
  • Build, Simulate, and Operate

What this gives you:

  • cleaner public URLs
  • stronger public-facing information architecture
  • easier section landing pages and teaching paths

What it costs:

  • path migration work
  • nav restructuring
  • possible redirects or broken old links unless handled carefully
  • a need to decide whether file layout should also change or just public slugs

More Pleasant Digital-Garden Structure

If the site leaned garden-first, you might choose flatter note-like slugs instead:

  • /notes/nav2-architecture/
  • /notes/controller-choice/
  • /notes/urdf-frames/
  • /notes/localization-recovery/
  • /notes/gazebo-physics/

What this gives you:

  • stronger sense of a linked note garden
  • less pressure to force every article into a strict section tree
  • easier acceptance of cross-disciplinary notes

What it costs:

  • weaker section identity
  • less obvious browse-by-discipline navigation
  • more reliance on backlinks, related links, and search quality

The Real Decision

If you like the current site but want it cleaner, the docs-site option is the natural refinement.

If you want readers to arrive anywhere and roam across adjacent ideas, the digital-garden option is the stronger fit.

If you want a compromise, keep the current docs-site skeleton and add more backlink-style discovery inside pages and section hubs.