I would like to propose using WikiBooks. I think it is suited for documentation of this kind. We could have a community area on there, and we could make use of some bots and scripts which turn the static text pages of the Wikimedia system into a dynamic, automated system of notifications, discussions, and feeds.
It is work, yes, but if we have enough MediaWiki editors on here, we could give it a go. For those who don't want to learn the syntax, that's fine. I would think we could make a TW <-> MW syntax comparison sheet to ease the headache, as well. But there are probably quite a few people here who know both. That being said, what??? is preventing us from making it multi-user? :) -Arlen On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Josiah <proge...@assays.tv> wrote: > Ciao Tobias > > Sorry for the delay. I been busy. I wish I had replied before because this > thread looks like its gone "off the boil". Which, from my point of view, is > unfortunate. > > Like many of the other posts in this discussion I find myself both > agreeing & disagreeing . > > I AGREE with you on TWO core things ... > > 1 - Some of the best DOCUMENTATION is written or curated by people > dedicated to that task, not mixed up with anything else. YOUR work is an > outstanding example of that. In no way do I want to detract from that fact. > > 2 - Google Groups as an ongoing DISCUSSION FORUM is as good as any > other. The fact it supports both web & email, & that it is reliable, gives > it a real "bedrock". > > Where I DIFFER somewhat is as follows ... > > A - Google Groups loses its own history constantly. Its best at > transient knowledge, very good for the thread at hand. Then, basically, its > past. > > B - Multiple forums across the net instantiate what I should probably > properly call "proto-documentation", rather than "Documentation" with a big > "D". But not here. This type of documentation is accessible ONLY where > there is ORGANISATION for longevity. > > To give an example from THIS group where GG fails badly. > TWEDERATION orientation & documentation exists as much in the Google Group > archive as it does on TW sites. And BOTH of them are REFRACTORY TO FINDING > because the way GG works makes it extremely cumbersome. Even if you KNOW to > look for them. Which you WON'T unless you have been reading everything. > That goes for BOTH the docu-discussion AND the site addresses for the > plugin. Pinning & Tagging would better enable that. A supplementary wiki on > critical developments directly connected to such threads even more so. > > C - What Riz has been doing on Reddit, just as one person with limited > technical scope & time, has really impressed upon me that we could be doing > MUCH BETTER. That is a lot to do with Reddit having searchable tagging of > posts, & posters. AND supplementary wikis built in. > > That is NOT so unusual. What is unusual is we persist with GG even > though its CHOPPING OFF emergent directions everyday because it has NO > interest in valuing history. > > All this is perhaps not about "documentation" in the stricter sense you > meant it. But, from a practical point of view its still highly relevant. > > Best wishes > Josiah > > > > Best wishes > Josiah > > > > On Monday, 12 December 2016 19:49:28 UTC+1, Tobias Beer wrote: >> >> Hi Josiah, >> >> >>> Its worth noting a MAJOR theme is the discussion was we are losing >>> valuable documentation all the time by not having an organised way to look >>> at past threads. TAGs might help, at least as an interim. >>> >> >> Please keep in mind that discussing a subject matter and responding with >> answers to highly specific requests is not at all the same as >> "documentation". From what I see, reddit does not provide a knowledge base, >> whereas TiddlyWiki.com very well has a splash of that. >> >> I think it is crucial for documentation to be curated, not just accrued. >> You can argue that there's a learning curve to both contributing as well as >> a latency to updates to tiddlywiki.com, but I would argue the quality >> and consistency that brings are very much of need. A more or less lose >> community built around another platform will quickly evolve into something >> that may or may not actually be so much about TiddlyWiki. >> >> You see, Google groups does one thing and it does that good: provide a >> platform for timely discussion. That is its purpose and it fulfills it. To >> me, extracting documentation for presentation and consumption elsewhere is >> an entirely different, ideally curated process. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Tobias. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TiddlyWiki" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/tiddlywiki/2dcb3f45-ea9f-4da8-af23-a02e8a4da71a%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/2dcb3f45-ea9f-4da8-af23-a02e8a4da71a%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CAJ1vdSSLNKMV96yR1EGT3md80Ydbit-2A3Mq6BC%2Bodvvf3iNBA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
