Wiki

Matthew King · 23 Sep 2006, 04:00 · from 2006-September.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: automatthew at gmail.com (Matthew King)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 23:00:52 -0500
Subject: (urth) Wiki
In-Reply-To: <20060921231720.98236.qmail at web54407.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20060921231720.98236.qmail at web54407.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <AAA0B9F7-39FB-46C0-918D-4C0B35E5B08B at gmail.com>

On Sep 21, 2006, at 6:17 PM, Nathan Spears wrote:
>
> Assuming the wiki would be more structured than "Chapter 1: An  
> endless series of comments", etc, you almost need a chapter and  
> verse breakdown of the book for cross-referential purposes.  And  
> you also need editors who will condense comments into appropriate  
> lengths for insertion into the main body of the wiki, and link out  
> to longer essays that touch on a verse but for whatever reason  
> (length, theme, etc) don't belong in the main body?  I'm imagining  
> here someone re-reading the BotNS and looking at the wiki  
> simultaneously, getting play by play, with links to appropriate  
> other places in the wiki.  Then at the end of the chapter or book  
> or tetralogy are essays dealing with themes and all that sort of  
> thing, which don't really have a place in the "flow" of reading the  
> book.
>
> So basically you need a few people to agree on a structure and then  
> impose it rigorously; otherwise the wiki will be like the list but  
> with more hyperlinks.  Which wouldn't be terrible but the other  
> would be more fun.

Maintaining this kind of structure with an off-the-shelf wiki might  
be difficult.  Are there any Ruby on Rails developers on the list who  
would like to collaborate on a custom solution?

Matthew

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net