I'm excited about the prospect of the wiki just because what I think Scid really needs is a place to go for all the simple questions (such as those I pose to the list) and a bunch of how-to and quick guide style information.
This discussion is becoming rapidly complex-- like chess. And like chess, perhaps I don't calculate well enough. But this is what I am hearing and thinking: 1) I communicated with Pascal and he indicated that scid-chess.org sounded like the best fit to him. So I plan to purchase and set that up. 2) Where the wiki can shine, I think, is in providing a place where a) enthusiasts can contribute and b) things that don't exactly fit into the "official documentation"--whether because they are digressions, tutorials, tips and tricks, etc-- can be shared in a central location. I think good ideas on the wiki site should find their way into the documentation via those who are working in that area. 3) The official scid docs remain where they are. It would be nice, I think, to synchronize a copy one way, from the official docs to a section on the wiki site, just for convenience. But at this time it doesn't appear that the wiki site should in any direct way originate changes to the official docs (F1 and on the scid site) 4) The mailing list remains the central place for discussion. I agree with Alexander that trying to hold discussions on the wiki doesn't make a lot of sense. It doesn't fit the form. I do think there should be "comment" or "talk" or some kind of pages where people can share meta-conversation without altering the page itself, but the wikipedia model of discussion isn't applicable here. 5) Take this for what it's worth, but I work with social software for a living and comparisons of most wikis to wikipedia are epic FAILs because wikipedia is unlike almost any other wiki due to its sheer size and popularity. For smaller organizations, a wiki is only as good as the facilitators (gardeners) who work with the casual contributors and-- this remains true in wikipedia too-- the very small core of regular contributors who will account for the great majority of changes. 6) re: wiki shortcomings. Pascal mentioned that wikis weren't good with complex data structures and didn't have finely granulated security... that is true. Almost all wikis (Except some "enterprise" commercial wikis that I don't have desire to support myself) suffer from the simplistic security. But I don't think that has to be a hindrance-- in my experience suffering from too much desire to participate is never a problem, so the main issue is preventing spam and there are simple ways to handle that (in my experience). Complex data structures (if I understand what Pascal means) are a tradeoff of the ease of editing and "webby" growth of wikis. But PmWiki does provide groups, page lists, tags, etc... and with judicious use of those we can, on the larger scale, make things useful. Really, I think simple is best. c -- Chris Lott ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com _______________________________________________ Scid-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users
