Links to Sutta Central broken?

Currently the links to Sutta Central suttas seem to be not working.
e.g. MN1

works fine for me, maybe a temporary glitch, there have been a couple or server errors today.

Hmm, seems to come and go.

Particularly on this AN guide I paste in:

They all work fine for me.

OK, seems fine. I tidied up the AN guide, expanding the NN-NN ranges when there were not too many, and I think it all now links properly.

OK, well there is the problem that I think is related to the problem I pointed out with Dhammapada references. That is that in the AN guide I refer to
AN1.277 AN1.130 - AN1.169 AN1.324, AN1.325, AN1.326, AN1.327
and so on and there is no link, presumably because those are part of ranges listed in the AN1 section.

Yes, that’s a difficult problem…

Indeed, I’m not expecting it to be fixed in a hurry, but in the context of the whole linking between Discourse and Sutta Central it is something to consider. Since your design seems to be to have a fixed target for sutta labels, such as AN1.277, it would not seem particularly sensible for me to, for example, change the reference to AN1.277 (see AN1.268-277), just so that it got linked right away. That may well turn out to be incorrect some time in the future.

Of course, you’re facing the same problem of proliferation that discouraged me from expanding out all of the sutta labels from AN1.130 - AN1.169…

There still appear to be bugs. I get no Discussion on Discourse link for this sutta:

@blake, the Discuss and Discover in the sidebar seems to be missing from pali texts, can we get it back?

Hmm, I didn’t notice that. I just looked at one that didn’t have English. In fact, the links seems to be missing from all texts apart from English. Presumably it should work on Thai, German, etc.

Also, the English translation always used to be first on the list. Now it’s not:

Pāli SN 1.1 SN 1 Oghataraṇa SN i 1 SN i 1 si 14 ▾

Or do we now have to set our home language?

I’m not sure what I’m supposed to be looking at here.

Hmm, sorry, too cryptic. :frowning:

The default language listed is “si”. It used to be that “en” was always listed first. I guess ideally one would pick the language that was listed first, and I presume that’s where you’re heading in the long term.

For me the default translation (the language listed to the left of the dropdown menu) changes according to whichever language you selected last. I think it is quite a neat approach.

Okay I’ve got it set to show discuss and discover for english translations, and all root texts.

I don’t think it’s beneficial to show discussions for all translation texts. These are English discussions. Ideally they are about the meaning of the original text and in reality most likely actually about the english translation. I know an argument could be made for bilingual users. The counter argument is like this. It’s possible to define links like de/sn56.131 which is specifically a link to the german translation of the last sutta in the SN. That would definitely be of potential interest to a german reader. But if every translation is “spammed” up with links to english discussions then it’s not going to stand out that there are language-specific discussions.

By the way, I think sooner or later we should have a fairly discrete popup saying “There are discussions regarding this text” when a text has discussions, to improve discoverability of relevant conversations when browsing the texts. What I say about language-specific content should be considered with that in mind.

This is a good point, but the linking does not know about the language of the discussion. One simply enters a code, like DN1, in Discourse. Or is the assumption that Discourse will only ever refer to English resources?

[quote=“blake, post:15, topic:1007”]
I don’t think it’s beneficial to show discussions for all translation texts. These are English discussions. Ideally they are about the meaning of the original text and in reality most likely actually about the english translation. I know an argument could be made for bilingual users. [/quote]

what’s the logic then of having it for Pali texts, as the majority of the users don’t or very little read it anyway?

the topics of English conversations are not necessarily philological and normally stem not from the language of translation, but from the import of the text

and does this format de/sn56.131 of referencing a sutta text in a particular language ensure that a link to this conversation will come up in the Discuss & Discover list for this specific language?

i don’t think having discussions in other languages is a good idea to begin with, because this will create segregation between the users and in-forum language ghettos

read the texts people can in whatever language they prefer, but conversations are best held in English for the sake of unity and engaging exchange of opinions and just because everyone who visits this site, so i imagine, speaks and understands it at least to some extent anyway

or it may be kept that way until the site is equipped with multilanguage interface and starts attracting Englishless users

See also my remarks here:

Pali and other original languages are somewhat of an exception, as they will be used or not used as the case may equally by people from all different language backgrounds. So I think it’s reasonable to show results on the pali texts for whatever the relevant translated language is, which at the moment is English.

However, the “results in sidebar” feature is, to my mind, more useful for beginners than for experts. It’s there specifically for people who want to styart with suttas and don’t know how to get help. Once you know that Discourse is here and what we have, there’s little real advantage to using the sidebar results, beyond a little convenience, perhaps. Anyway, my point is that I wouldn’t expect people who are actually reading Pali, Sanskrit, ancient Chinese, or Tibetan, to need the sidebar very much, so it’s a bit of a moot point. Still, it doesn’t hurt to show some results there.

the thing is that Discuss & Discover pulls up the list of links not only to posted explanatory texts/talks, which some might need for better understanding of the particular source text, but to users’ informal conversations as well where the source text is referenced, and in the latter an English speaking reader might be interested regardless of the need to deepen his/her understanding of the source text

if the aim of Discuss & Discover feature is aid in the study of the source texts then it would be natural to limit the results by posts and topics from Essays, AV and Courses sections of the Discourse