On Thu, May 10, 2007 3:40 am, John Beckett wrote: > Tom Purl wrote: >> Here's what I propose we do: >> 1. Finalize a tip formatting standard. >> 2. Use the best available script that supports this standard. >> 3. Update the best available script if necessary. >> 4. Revise the standard if necessary. >> 5. Convert a tips sample. >> 6. Review the sample and revise the script if necessary. > > Good. But to keep our discussion focussed, please do what you > did last time: Put a sample tip on a wiki page so we can agree > on its features.
We already have a tip on the page that people have been working on. You can see the link to it on the following page: * http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Learning_the_vi_editor/Vim/TipsSandbox > Please take Gene's advice and manually edit the page to how you think > it should look. Once the format is agreed, we can ask for a script. > > I recommend: > - Propose a format for the URL of each tip, as well as > the format of the page. > > - Omit the info box with author, date, tip rating, Vim version. > It's too hard to maintain, and too intrusive. > > - Keep the comments on the tip page, with a very simple > comment heading in front of each, something like: > -----By UserName on March 8, 2001 14:51----- > > To make it easy to edit the page, the comment heading should be > a single line in the wiki source. I agree that we should keep things as simple as possible, at least for the initial conversion. After that, when all updates are manual, we can be more fancy :) This not only saves time, but I just don't think that it is possible to create a conversion script that can convert plain text that doesn't use a single markup style to a consistent format. > -Or- Put all the comments on the talk page, with the format as > above. However, that seems unnecessarily tricky to do in > practice (it doubles the number of pages we have to work with). > > I favour putting the comments in the main page to make it easier > to clean up the tip. When we see a tip with old-style comments, > we would know that it needed an overhaul. So do I. >> 1. Let's use this mailing list to coordinate the project. >> All comments regarding wiki page format, however, should be >> written to the "talk" section of the affected wiki page. > > Please be more explicit. Will we use the vim or the vim-dev > list? I was referring to the user mailing list. > How can we comment on the wiki page format on the "talk" section? Each page has a "talk" tab, and you can use it to comment on a wiki page. > I think we should use the vim mailing list for all discussions until a > decision (your decision!) is made to finalise the wiki site, format, > and script. Ok, what does everyone else think? I'm open to this, especially since it's easier to keep up with the mailing list than it is to keep up with a Wikibooks watchlist page. > Final suggestion: Please start a new thread (new subject) which > we will follow until everything is finalised, rather than > replying to this. I agree. I'm a big fan of proper mailing list thread etiquette, even though I completely ignored it for this discussion :) I plan on starting a new thread for each deadline, and I think we should be fairly granular when it comes to thread creation. It makes things easier to follow. If in doubt, create a new thread! > It would be great if you would consider what I and others have > written, then make a proposal with what you think. Thanks for the feedback! My "proposal" is basically what I said yesterday - that we follow some sort of schedule and make some decisions. I like your suggestions. What does everyone else think? Tom Purl
