On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Tim Michelsen
<timmichel...@gmx-topmail.de>wrote:
>
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
> > Would this be like gmail labels then - any label, no heirarchical
> structure?
> I do not use gmail.
>
> But by nature, tags as in Web2.0 are no hirarchial (statistical ordering
> in tag clouds).
I think this may be useful - like keywords - but insufficient; I think we
need to be able to have structure - relationships.
> > How would you define categories?
>
> The administrator of wiki defines the categories. Users could make
> proposals.
I'm not sure if I like this; top-heavy...
> > extend them?
> I think we can have a look at the web2py manual. The table of contents
> could give us an idea what topics we are dealing with.
This is ok for a starting point. If you are talking wiki, this seems too
rigid; if you are talking user's manual / book, then some things have to be
locked down at some point.
> > structure them? for
> > example: If you had UI and CSS, would they have some relationship?
>
> Let's not have this too complex:
That's my whole point - the right structure will simplify. Admin defined
will lock down; too rigid for development; no relationship will be too
messy (too complex to figure out where things are - as it is now - what are
we up to now, 14 different places to search? Imagine the categories! If
there isn't some way to put order to them it is too complex).
We are not talking wikipedia here. we are talking "what will make the wiki
useful as a "beta" ground for accepting a few things:
- FAQ (replace Alterego)
- Tutorials ("how I did x,y,z"), and updates, reviews, alternates -
better ways...
- pre-manual content (what I want to add to the users manual; like a PEP,
for discussion, review, addition)
and maybe a few more things (links, references to videos, etc.). The
manual will not take everything from the wiki, as far as I'm concerned. The
wiki should be useful on it's own.
So - If "personA" submits pre-manual content, and is promoted to a chapter
in the manual, I imagine something like this:
They will start their section (pre-manual) from the wiki, incorporate /
write / expand pieces of FAQ (possibly), and modify / update / combine the
best of examples from one or more tutorials. This is then the manual
section.
Now, personA may want to add tags to mark all the things in the wiki that
are now in his/her section.
PersonA may _also_ have references to other sections, and tag those things
in the wiki.
Now - the wiki should become more useful for people to find places to add
things;
The section (personA) in the manual should be easier to update (based on
wiki tags);
And the content of the manual will be organized by a heirarchy of "kinds-of"
things it talks about, and the wiki should encourage users who add new
content to think about general category, and also add their own specific
keywords under that (that is the list of "kind-of" things should be able to
easily expand;).
I think the table mod is not ready to be made - I think it needs some more
thiniking (and I think this is all good discussion).
- Yarko
>
>
> The mother of wikis (wikipedia) has
> * supra-structures: portals -- e.g.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Free_software
>
> * under each portal you can find categories in which articles are
> grouped in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Free_software/categories
>
> In our wiki:
> Portal = future categories ( or topics, you name it)
> Category = tag: already existing => the administrator just needs to
> match the tags into the specific categories.
>
> The administrator (or better a script) would export the wiki in a fashon:
>
> user_wiki/category1/pagetitle1
> user_wiki/category1/pagetitle2
> user_wiki/category2/pagetitle1
> user_wiki/category2/pagetitle2
>
> It's very easy in Sphinx to change page order:
> => move/rename the page and adapt the TOC.
>
> This is my suggestion to solve this issue. But you are right. Converting
> the wiki into a user documentation is going from a non-linear
> thought-driven tool to a linear structure-driven tool with the aim to
> create a readable and accessible document.
>
> I think this thread has clearly shown two things:
> * many users feel that documentation is scattered around and therefore
> difficult to access
> * documentation could be updated and improved
> * there are users willing to contribute by
> * collecting info
> * writing artciles: blogs, wiki, FAQ.
>
> Let's harness this motivation.
>
> Kind regards,
> Timmie
>
>
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"web2py Web Framework" group.
To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
