www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Two WIKIs?

reply Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:
Hi there,

I am a little bit confused. Starting at

        http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html

the first entry in the list directs me to the WIKI

        http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FaqRoadmap

In that WIKI, the topic "How to become more involved" has two links for
contributing to a WIKI:

        http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?Wiki4D
and
        http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi

Both seem similar but not identical. Which one is the official WIKI? What is
the point of the other one? Could the unofficial WIKI perhaps be closed or
at least be clearly marked to avoid future confusion?

Ciao,
Nobbi
Jun 19 2004
next sibling parent reply J C Calvarese <jcc7 cox.net> writes:
Norbert Nemec wrote:

 Hi there,
 
 I am a little bit confused. Starting at
 
         http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html
 
 the first entry in the list directs me to the WIKI
 
         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FaqRoadmap
 
 In that WIKI, the topic "How to become more involved" has two links for
 contributing to a WIKI:
 
         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?Wiki4D
 and
         http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
 
 Both seem similar but not identical. Which one is the official WIKI? What is


These URLs all go to the same place:
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage

The only difference that I know of is that the "Preferences" for prowiki 
and wikiservice is separate (probably because of how the cookie is set). 
Other than that (and the different URLs), they are the same. The content 
is the same. Recent changes is the same:

http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?RecentChanges
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?RecentChanges

Have you seen some differences that I haven't noted above?


 the point of the other one? Could the unofficial WIKI perhaps be closed or
 at least be clearly marked to avoid future confusion?


There are two due to historical reasons:
http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/12175

I don't that one can or should be "marked" as official because I think 
both URLs point to the same place.

I hope this helps.


 
 Ciao,
 Nobbi



-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
Jun 19 2004
parent reply Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:
J C Calvarese wrote:


 These URLs all go to the same place:
 http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
 http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage
 http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
 http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage


Thanks for that info. I realize that I actually was looking at different
parts of the same wiki all the time.

Looking at my own confusion, I would suggest to clean up the situation in
several ways:

* Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to see
two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link
leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it
actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two
places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or
alternative.

* The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term
usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any
other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should simply
be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be called FAQ or
given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.

* The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of a
book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When I'm
lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home" or
"index".

* On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ page,
there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the top of the
wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ (pointing to
the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the link list. (If the
wiki is officially supported by the core D project, then it should not
appear in the link list among all the third-party pages at all.
Jun 19 2004
parent reply J C Calvarese <jcc7 cox.net> writes:
Norbert Nemec wrote:

 J C Calvarese wrote:
 
 

These URLs all go to the same place:
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage


 
 
 Thanks for that info. I realize that I actually was looking at different
 parts of the same wiki all the time.
 
 Looking at my own confusion, I would suggest to clean up the situation in
 several ways:


I agree it can be confusing.


 
 * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to see
 two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link
 leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it
 actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two
 places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or
 alternative.


So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one 
is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.


 
 * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term
 usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any
 other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should simply
 be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be called FAQ or
 given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.


I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL?
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ

Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)


 
 * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of a
 book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When I'm
 lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home" or
 "index".


Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any 
case, I don't know how change it.)


 * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ page,
 there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the top of the
 wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ (pointing to
 the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the link list. (If the
 wiki is officially supported by the core D project, then it should not
 appear in the link list among all the third-party pages at all.


I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and 
the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such 
as the one you describe) would be beneficial.

-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
Jun 19 2004
parent reply Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:
J C Calvarese wrote:


 * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to
 see two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link
 leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it
 actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two
 places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or
 alternative.


 
 So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one
 is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.


I don't really care which one. What is the internal connection between the
two? Is the one mirroring the other? Maybe prowiki might be the better
choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more
international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a
private or a German language site.


 * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term
 usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any
 other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should
 simply be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be
 called FAQ or given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.


 
 I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL?
 http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ
 
 Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)


Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick! "Roadmap"
is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used. People reading
it will expect something about the future plans for D. For example:

http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html
http://www.go-mono.com/mono-roadmap.html

Or, even more famous: The processor roadmap of AMD and Intel. Even Microsoft
(if anybody should actually care about their opinion) uses the term
"roadmap" in this meaning.

I admit, that googling for the term "roadmap" also brings some hits for use
similar to that in the D wiki, but still I would say, it is just a common
mistake.


 * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of
 a book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When
 I'm lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home"
 or "index".


 
 Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any
 case, I don't know how change it.)


OK, if it is hard to change, never mind. Anyway: I guess the most confusing
point in that respect is, that the term Frontpage appears in the
"menu"-line together with all these wiki-internal links. A separate
"navigation"-pane on every page, showing some hierarchy, would be clearer.
But then, there does not seems to be any strict hierarchy at all among the
pages?


 * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
 page, there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the top
 of the wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ
 (pointing to the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the
 link list. (If the wiki is officially supported by the core D project,
 then it should not appear in the link list among all the third-party
 pages at all.


 
 I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and
 the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such
 as the one you describe) would be beneficial.


OK. Over to Walter, then...
Jun 19 2004
next sibling parent reply "Phill" <phill pacific.net.au> writes:
"Norbert Nemec" <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> wrote in message
news:cb3b46$2869$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 J C Calvarese wrote:


 * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to
 see two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a






link

 leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it
 actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two
 places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or
 alternative.


 So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one
 is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.


 I don't really care which one. What is the internal connection between the
 two? Is the one mirroring the other? Maybe prowiki might be the better
 choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more
 international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a
 private or a German language site.


 * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this






term

 usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in






any

 other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should
 simply be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be
 called FAQ or given some really descriptive name, it that is to






general.

 I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL?
 http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ

 Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)


 Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick! "Roadmap"
 is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used. People reading
 it will expect something about the future plans for D. For example:

 http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html
 http://www.go-mono.com/mono-roadmap.html

 Or, even more famous: The processor roadmap of AMD and Intel. Even


Microsoft

 (if anybody should actually care about their opinion) uses the term
 "roadmap" in this meaning.

 I admit, that googling for the term "roadmap" also brings some hits for


use

 similar to that in the D wiki, but still I would say, it is just a common
 mistake.


 * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page"






of

 a book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When
 I'm lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home"
 or "index".


 Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any
 case, I don't know how change it.)


 OK, if it is hard to change, never mind. Anyway: I guess the most


confusing

 point in that respect is, that the term Frontpage appears in the
 "menu"-line together with all these wiki-internal links. A separate
 "navigation"-pane on every page, showing some hierarchy, would be clearer.
 But then, there does not seems to be any strict hierarchy at all among the
 pages?


 * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
 page, there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the






top

 of the wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ
 (pointing to the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the
 link list. (If the wiki is officially supported by the core D project,
 then it should not appear in the link list among all the third-party
 pages at all.


 I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and
 the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such
 as the one you describe) would be beneficial.


 OK. Over to Walter, then...


Shouldnt it be "over to JC " ?
Jun 20 2004
parent Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:
Phill wrote:


 * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
 page, there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the






 top

 of the wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ
 (pointing to the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the
 link list. (If the wiki is officially supported by the core D project,
 then it should not appear in the link list among all the third-party
 pages at all.


 I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and
 the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such
 as the one you describe) would be beneficial.


 OK. Over to Walter, then...


 Shouldnt it be "over to JC " ?


If I'm correct, the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ pages are maintained by
Walter. The wiki is maintained by JC. My comment was about adding a link
from the first to the latter, so Walter would be the one to decide about
it.
Jun 20 2004
prev sibling parent reply Helmut Leitner <helmut.leitner wikiservice.at> writes:
Norbert Nemec wrote:

 * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to
 see two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link
 leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it
 actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two
 places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or
 alternative.


 So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one
 is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.




Me too.
 

 I don't really care which one. What is the internal connection between the
 two? Is the one mirroring the other? 


No, they just point to the same place. 


 Maybe prowiki might be the better
 choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more
 international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a
 private or a German language site.


Austrian and german language. Private would be a wrong guess.
 

 * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term
 usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any
 other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should
 simply be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be
 called FAQ or given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.


 I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL?
 http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ

 Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)


 
 Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick! "Roadmap"
 is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used. People reading
 it will expect something about the future plans for D. For example:


I agree, I chose the name. It's my fault.

The preferred ways are:
  (1) change the name yourself (it's a wiki after all)
  (2) post your comments to the wiki (so that the wikizens there will know)
 

 I admit, that googling for the term "roadmap" also brings some hits for use
 similar to that in the D wiki, but still I would say, it is just a common
 mistake.


As I said, you are right. No need to get religious about this.
 

 * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of
 a book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When
 I'm lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home"
 or "index".


 Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any
 case, I don't know how change it.)


 
 OK, if it is hard to change, never mind. 


It is not hard to change, I can be configured in a minute.
There is 
  - a label at the link bar ("FrontPage", maybe "Home")
  - a page linked to the label (usually "FrontPage")


 Anyway: I guess the most confusing
 point in that respect is, that the term Frontpage appears in the
 "menu"-line together with all these wiki-internal links. A separate
 "navigation"-pane on every page, showing some hierarchy, would be clearer.
 But then, there does not seems to be any strict hierarchy at all among the
 pages?


No, with a few exceptions, they exist in a flat space.
Hierarchies are hard to maintain in a multiple point of view system.
We use folders and roadmaps (the real ones) to create order in wikis.
 

 I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and
 the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such
 as the one you describe) would be beneficial.


 
 OK. Over to Walter, then...


The wiki was created to support the D community.
If I can help, I'll do what I can. A consensus would be fine.

-- 
Helmut Leitner    leitner hls.via.at
Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com
Jun 20 2004
parent reply Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:
Helmut Leitner wrote:


 Maybe prowiki might be the better
 choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more
 international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a
 private or a German language site.


 
 Austrian and german language.


True, not to ignore all these beautiful special expressions you Austrians
use...


 Private would be a wrong guess. 


Of course, in this case. Just my general experience with national
domain-names in similar contexts. Projects setting up official pages with
international audience would usually pick .com or .org names. Inofficial
sites are more likely to use the national domain-name of some hosting
provider.


 Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick!
 "Roadmap" is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used.
 People reading it will expect something about the future plans for D. For
 example:


 
 I agree, I chose the name. It's my fault.
 
 The preferred ways are:
   (1) change the name yourself (it's a wiki after all)
   (2) post your comments to the wiki (so that the wikizens there will
   know)


I'm not very comfortable with writing to the wiki yet. Especially, I don't
think it is a good idea to choose editing the title of some major page as
my first action as a newcomer... :-)


 No, with a few exceptions, they exist in a flat space.
 Hierarchies are hard to maintain in a multiple point of view system.
 We use folders and roadmaps (the real ones) to create order in wikis.


Guess it will take me some time to adjust to that philosophy. I've just a
little experience with two other WIKI systems and each one seems to have a
philosophy on its own. But then - this one seems simple enough to learn
quickly.
Jun 20 2004
parent Helmut Leitner <helmut.leitner wikiservice.at> writes:
Norbert Nemec wrote:

 
 Helmut Leitner wrote:

 Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick!
 "Roadmap" is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used.
 People reading it will expect something about the future plans for D. For
 example:


 I agree, I chose the name. It's my fault.

 The preferred ways are:
   (1) change the name yourself (it's a wiki after all)
   (2) post your comments to the wiki (so that the wikizens there will
   know)


 
 I'm not very comfortable with writing to the wiki yet. Especially, I don't
 think it is a good idea to choose editing the title of some major page as
 my first action as a newcomer... :-)


If the change makes perfect sense, you don't need to worry.

On the other hand, it would be perfect wiki behaviour, to
  - create your homepage
  - suggest the change or other improvements
      - at the page in question or
      - at the MessageBoard 
 

 No, with a few exceptions, they exist in a flat space.
 Hierarchies are hard to maintain in a multiple point of view system.
 We use folders and roadmaps (the real ones) to create order in wikis.


 
 Guess it will take me some time to adjust to that philosophy. I've just a
 little experience with two other WIKI systems and each one seems to have a
 philosophy on its own. 


Which wikis?


 But then - this one seems simple enough to learn quickly.


I hope so. We always listen to feedback and try to improve the system.

-- 
Helmut Leitner    leitner hls.via.at
Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com
Jun 20 2004
prev sibling parent reply Helmut Leitner <helmut.leitner wikiservice.at> writes:
Norbert Nemec wrote:

 I am a little bit confused. Starting at
 
         http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html
 
 the first entry in the list directs me to the WIKI
 
         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FaqRoadmap
 
 In that WIKI, the topic "How to become more involved" has two links for
 contributing to a WIKI:
 
         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?Wiki4D
 and
         http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
 
 Both seem similar but not identical. Which one is the official WIKI? What is
 the point of the other one? Could the unofficial WIKI perhaps be closed or
 at least be clearly marked to avoid future confusion?


I'm sorry about the confusion. Currently a number of domains 
all point to the same server-directory and can be used to 
the same effect. 

Being a non-profit-project, the org-Domains seem most appropriate
to access Wiki4D:
   http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi

If contributors prefer, we can care for a special domain for 
this wiki.

-- 
Helmut Leitner    leitner hls.via.at
Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com
Jun 20 2004
parent Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:
Helmut Leitner wrote:


 If contributors prefer, we can care for a special domain for
 this wiki.


Don't think there is a need for that. prowiki.org is so neutral that there
shouldn't be any confusion.
Jun 20 2004