Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

Documentation: Let's do it NOW!

 [1/22] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 8-Aug-2003 9:00


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
> rebol.com really needs a search engine, to which we can plug > our own information (in any form: web refs, code, text, etc.).
Hi, just a note to all that might not follow Rebol from the beginning. There is/was once a Rebol word dictonary Reblet that allowed to add your own notes to each entry. You had a filter to select the words of some category (like GUI, control, logic). IMO this is the right way to go. Let's extend this Reblet with a central P2P synced database that users can download/update. New entries should pass a peer-review process to get into it. The mailinglist can be used to discuss peer review rejected things. The idea of easy-vid, easy-draw can be used to provide click-able examples. Lots of examples for each word! Further I think such a Reblet would perfectly fit into the library project (this doesn't mean that the Library people should do it). The dictonary Reblet could be extended with a library Reblet. With such a tool, we have 80%+ of all required infos in one place. Next thing would be to add tutorials etc. It's like a coordinated WiKi idea. I still say that biggest problem of Rebol is information fragmentation. New users need a lot of time to get started. To much places to look at. Anyway, I have written enough and to get things started now I'm doing the first step: If no better suited person is found, I'm willing to start and manage this project. But I won't do it only myself ;-). So, who is going to join the project? Robert

 [2/22] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 8-Aug-2003 12:30


Hi Robert and all, just abstract talk as always, - you know what you can expect of me already, don't you? ;-) Well, I will try to be on-topic. Some ppl wondered, why I am so inclined into having some features in sake of just having some features if I really don't need them. I think I can reasonably explain it. I come from business integration area and I try to look at most things in the way of how well they play together. And as you say, robert - scattered resources may destroy what could otherwise be very succesfull effort .... One concrete example is phoenix. I suggested them to swich to IOS. I know that the drawback is IOS is non-existant for AmigaOS/MorphOS, but even then happened what I expected. They formed Tiki (nothing agains wiki - I can value Graham's work in such regard!) and plenty of ml, IRC. But - the feeling of closer cooperation is still missing imo. It can't be imo easily achieved by mixing various existing technologies, which don't play well together. Well - what you propose is very good move imo. I wonder why the reblet is not more used! It looks really nice: http://www.rebol.cz/~can/rebol-view/image37.jpg (domain contains another various view related screenshots, just change the number) I think that RT did first step to such effort - View desktop. It just didn't take up. We should ask ourselves - why? And - are there any other examples of X-Internet efforts which are successfull? Imo yes - look at MacOSx Dr. Watson - http://www.karelia.com/watson/ .... excuse me - but isn't it EXACTLY the area View would excell at? Wrapping the web via X-Internet app center? Some other day I downloaded Java WebStart. It is just a bit enahnced ripp-off of View desktop GO button. You can see icons, which represent apps, which you can run. Typical app takes KBs, tens of KBs, or hundreds of KBs. Those Java weblets look simply rough, ugly. But - what is the difference? How did I get it onto my desktop? Well - plug-in! I was offered download. I just ask myself - if other can do it, why don't us? Deployment - that is the word! I can assure you, that no average joe user will go to rebol.com, look for some Rebol View, trying to download it, install it, set-up it etc. It has to be offered to user, it has to download itself, place itself into some directory (or just ask for placement - AltME really simplifies its usage at least) and provide basic, simplified interface (we already know that some of us are really capable of producing cool looking reblets!). My idea was to call such product RebolWebPlayer or something like that. Imo idea of complete desktop (as View simulates) can scare some ppl - they already work in native OS desktop and are not interested in substitutes. What about something like single dialog, app-task-bar etc.? It would be much more acceptable. RebolWebPlayer would look for its updates (selectable) to ensure basic engine, protocols, are up-to-date. The idea was to eventually plug-in some P2P network scheme, use dialects for custom protocols. Each app would install itself into sand-box sub-directory, user could select, if, and how often to check for updates, etc. I have strong feeling something like that would be a success. Rebol DOC project is just one of such apps. But unless we don't have more powerfull engine under the hood (being it Uniserve, Maarten's new stuff he works upon), I would warn in some P2P principles from the very beginning - we will create yet another isoltated system, it just will be usabe directly from View. I would start to think how to enhance current Dictionary reblet (resizing for e.g.) and ask RT what they think of a player idea, as Carl mentions following in his recent amiga.org interview: Of course, the final solution has to be put the X Internet into context within a consistent system of some sort or another, whether it be REBOL/IOS, SafeWorlds AltME, or some new type of web browser plugin. It's fun to think about. And, I think it will be fun to build. REBOL dictionary viewer however could be one of apps, which could leave on its own - it will be used mainly by developers, so at least I would put it into View as a component and offer it in standard 'help output and create 'vhelp mezzanine .... So yes, it could be usefull, - definitely ... I would just be carefull to overcomplicate it in the beginning .... -pekr- Robert M. Muench wrote:

 [3/22] from: maximo:meteorstudios at: 8-Aug-2003 9:20


> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert M. Muench [mailto:bannarama]
<<quoted lines omitted: 8>>
> own notes to each entry. You had a filter to select the words of some > category (like GUI, control, logic).
(you mean that the commented code is not a miracle apparition ... ;-) yes that was cool, and I wonder why it died...
> IMO this is the right way to go. Let's extend this Reblet > with a central > P2P synced database that users can download/update.
The system should have a web presence too IMHO, its easier to access anywhere anytime... that't just about what I proposed, but like I said, I can do db... but I'm lethal with gfx and gui's... hey this could be a PERRFECT project for steel... if you wish... I was itching for a case study to help me focus steel... this is something I'd gladly sponsor within steel, if the community will let me ;-). I was thinking to add such an auto documentation engine for steel itself, but I'd rather participate in a global solution and use that within steel... maybe we could add a two-layered approach (api + tools) ... one standard engine (like a standard cgi template if you wish) that ANYONE could use for his own documentation server/review etc. then, anyone INCLUDING RT could search accross all known and live doc servers on the net and perform a community wide search of ANY topic ;-) when servers die (as they are doing for the new links page (you know the little "live" dodad besides the link) well, they are removed from the list of active servers and no longer jam the searches...
> New entries should > pass a peer-review process to get into it. The mailinglist can be used > to discuss peer review rejected things. The idea of easy-vid, > easy-draw > can be used to provide click-able examples. Lots of examples for each > word!
YESS!
> Further I think such a Reblet would perfectly fit into the library > project (this doesn't mean that the Library people should do it). The > dictonary Reblet could be extended with a library Reblet.
If just pathed the library modules into the standard api as I describe above, then they could add their stuff themselves (actually anyone could, which is the whole point, universal point of entry) that's what I'm ranting about everytime the topic comes back...
> Anyway, I have written enough and to get things started now I'm doing > the first step: If no better suited person is found, I'm willing to > start and manage this project. But I won't do it only myself ;-). So, > who is going to join the project? Robert
who is going to help US, you mean ;-) thanks for the inspiration... -MAx

 [4/22] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 8-Aug-2003 9:27


Hi Robert, et al RMM> Hi, just a note to all that might not follow Rebol from the beginning. RMM> There is/was once a Rebol word dictonary Reblet that allowed to add your RMM> own notes to each entry. You had a filter to select the words of some RMM> category (like GUI, control, logic). I still use it here. There are still times where the extended notes contain useful tidbits not in the HELP for a function. I agree it would be a great central piece, and that it would fit well with the library project in some way. For the Library project, we talked about various ways the submission and collaboration could work and--at least for now--we're going with something relatively simple. Sunanda has been working on the new submission pieces (you can submit scripts now, but we have to do things manually, and the goal is to automate everything so there's no delay waiting for us to get involved). RMM> Further I think such a Reblet would perfectly fit into the library RMM> project (this doesn't mean that the Library people should do it). The RMM> dictonary Reblet could be extended with a library Reblet. With such a RMM> tool, we have 80%+ of all required infos in one place. Next thing would RMM> be to add tutorials etc. Being able to launch other scripts is a good thing. LAUNCH is the necessary piece, though there are still security risks of course. The Librarian reblet has an option that lets us DO scripts directly, but we need LAUNCH to keep from having scripts that use VIEW eat its main window. Details like that. I'm all for the project, but I need to focus my free time on the Library project first. I'll be happy to comment and work on the Library side of things. Whether the Library becomes the hub, or the other way around, a central doc station would be a terrific thing IMO. -- Gregg

 [5/22] from: SunandaDH::aol::com at: 8-Aug-2003 13:42


Gregg:
> Sunanda has been working on the new > submission pieces (you can submit scripts now, but we have to do > things manually, and the goal is to automate everything so there's no > delay waiting for us to get involved).
Not just me, Gregg and Volker too as the core library team -- and Robert Muench is chipping in a chopped Make-Doc-Pro for Library documentation. I hope we'll have something to show within a month. The improvements we are cooking up will make the Library more interactive, and scripts will be able to have: ** documentation -- you'll be able to add a script *and* the user manual or How I wrote this article or whatever attached to the script. That should make scripts easier to use, and make the library more of a place to browse for inspiration and REBOL knowledge, rather than just bare scripts. ** discussion -- anyone can start a discussion thread about a script -- to request new functions, report errors, suggest improvements etc. You could image some of the recent discussion about XML parsing hanging off an XML script, leading to the final version in the Library being the distillation of many people's comments. ** ownership -- the owner(s) of a script can update it, or the documentation, or moderate the discussion thread hanging from it, without having to go through the slow, manual, contribution process we have now. We've got a fair bit of backroom work to do to enable that, so when I say I hope we'll have something to show in a month, I don't mean everything. But we are whittling away at the outstanding coding tasks. I'd like to see the Script Library as a nexus for anyone who cares about quality REBOL scripts to contribute scripts or ideas or notes. That will make it a very valuable resource for new people learning REBOL. None of that replaces the ideas discussed in this thread about a documentation wiki and other mechanisms. But I think those ideas fit in well with what we have planned. There's quite a bit of new code in place already on the offline test system. If any one fancies a spot of system testing to help us iron out the bugs, and you have a web-server installed locally on your computer -- please drop me an email. Thanks! Sunanda

 [6/22] from: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 10-Aug-2003 10:29


Hi all,
> Gregg: > > Sunanda has been working on the new
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> Muench is chipping in a chopped Make-Doc-Pro for Library documentation. > I hope we'll have something to show within a month. The improvements we
are
> cooking up will make the Library more interactive, and scripts will be
able to
> have: > > ** documentation -- you'll be able to add a script *and* the user manual
or
> "How I wrote this" article or whatever attached to the script. That should > make scripts easier to use, and make the library more of a place to browse
for
> inspiration and REBOL knowledge, rather than just bare scripts.
this functionality (documentation) has been already achieved at the R.E.P site ( http://www.compkarori.com/vanilla ). It contains bug data some of us have written, documentation to some of our scripts, features of Rebol and more. It is a pity that the library team tries to duplicate the functionality.
> ** discussion -- anyone can start a discussion thread about a script -- to > request new functions, report errors, suggest improvements etc. You could
image
> some of the recent discussion about XML parsing hanging off an XML script, > leading to the final version in the Library being the distillation of many > people's comments.
This is a functionality already present at the R.E.P. site too.
> ** ownership -- the owner(s) of a script can update it, or the
documentation,
> or moderate the discussion thread hanging from it, without having to go > through the slow, manual, contribution process we have now.
At the R.E.P. site not just the owner, but everyone can update the documentation, enhance it etc. I suggest everyone to try to write at least one piece of information there.
> We've got a fair bit of backroom work to do to enable that, so when I say
I
> hope we'll have something to show in a month, I don't mean everything. But
we
> are whittling away at the outstanding coding tasks. > > I'd like to see the Script Library as a nexus for anyone who cares about > quality REBOL scripts to contribute scripts or ideas or notes. That will
make it a
> very valuable resource for new people learning REBOL. > > None of that replaces the ideas discussed in this thread about a > documentation wiki and other mechanisms. But I think those ideas fit in
well with what we
> have planned.
The documentation wiki idea looks like yet another forking in this area. Did Robert have a look at the R.E.P. site?
> There's quite a bit of new code in place already on the offline test
system.
> If any one fancies a spot of system testing to help us iron out the bugs,
and
> you have a web-server installed locally on your computer -- please drop me
an
> email. > > Thanks! > Sunanda
-Ladislav

 [7/22] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 10-Aug-2003 11:14


Hi, as said I'm going to start this project and push it so here are the firs steps: 1. Anyone a good idea for a name? Suggestions from my side: - RebolDOC - WordIT - DICTator (maybe a bit hard) 2. The dictonary is an IOS application at the moment. So we need to make a stand-alone one of it. (We can even create an encaped version. I have the CMD-SDK here.) 4. I'm going to host it on my private home-page (at the moment). 5. The latest version I have here is dated: 25-Jun-2002. Does anyone has a newer version? 6. Are there are any people that worked to create this Reblet? The words data-file has this line: ;Thanks for inputs and suggestions from: ;lmecir_mbox.vol.cz, allen_rebolforces.com, Al.Bri_xtra.co.nz, giesse_writeme.com If those people can give some input etc. how the words list was created etc. this would help to get things started. Well that's it for now. More later. Robert

 [8/22] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 10-Aug-2003 11:14


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> I agree it would be a great central piece, and that it would > fit well with the library project in some way.
Hi, ok so we are 3 now ;-)?
> For the Library project, we talked about various ways the > submission and collaboration could work and--at least for > now--we're going with something relatively simple.
That's good. We have to keep things simple. My goal is to get this thing out to the people ASAP and let it develop. IMO the most important part is to provide a good submission way.
> I'm all for the project, but I need to focus my free time on > the Library project first. I'll be happy to comment and work > on the Library side of things. Whether the Library becomes > the hub, or the other way around, a central doc station would > be a terrific thing IMO.
Fine! More information to come... Robert

 [9/22] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 10-Aug-2003 11:14


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> Well - what you propose is very good move imo. I wonder why > the reblet is not more used! It looks really nice:
Hi, that's what I think too. It just needs to be enhanced to inlcude things like: - a web-interface for submitting things (feedback like, maybe with RT channel after peer review) - a group system where experts will review submits etc. - an editor group that keeps everything in same style and look & feel - etc.
> I would warn in some P2P principles from the very > beginning - we will create yet another isoltated system, it > just will be usabe directly from View.
The P2P term was not technology oriented used by me. I just meant to have the community work on it and use a simple update mechanism for distribution.
> I would just be carefull to overcomplicate it in the > beginning ....
;-) I never expected to hear this from you Petr. You know me, I like simple things and should be simple. Robert

 [10/22] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 10-Aug-2003 11:14


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> The system should have a web presence too IMHO, its easier to > access anywhere anytime...
Hi, yes. IMO one day we should get to a state where a Reblet can have a web-equivalent with just one function call. Too early at the moment but I'm thinking in these lines.
> hey this could be a PERRFECT project for steel... if you > wish...
I need to better undestand steel. And as Petr said, let's start simple and improve over time.
> I was itching for a case study to help me focus > steel... this is something I'd gladly sponsor within steel, > if the community will let me ;-).
I'm totaly open to give it a try. IMO working with variations is a good way to understand your problem.
> maybe we could add a two-layered approach (api + tools) ... > one standard engine (like a standard cgi template if you > wish) that ANYONE could use for his own documentation > server/review etc. then, anyone INCLUDING RT could search > accross all known and live doc servers on the net and perform > a community wide search of ANY topic ;-)
Good idea. But wait! Before we start to collect all ideas again on the mailing list and get lost of them, let's setup a coordinated process.
> who is going to help US, you mean ;-)
:-) Fine we are two now! Robert

 [11/22] from: SunandaDH:aol at: 10-Aug-2003 5:45


Gregg:
> I'm all for the project, but I need to focus my free time on the > Library project first. I'll be happy to comment and work on the > Library side of things. Whether the Library becomes the hub, or the > other way around, a central doc station would be a terrific thing IMO.
Me too (or do I mean loop 2 [print "me"]) I see a documentation project as highly complementary to the planned next phase of the Library. The Library is unlikely to become a hub for documentation -- it'll be a hub for **scripts** which *can* be fully documented. Example: there may be some scripts doing clever things with parse, and the authors have added extensive notes about how those clever things work. But it won't be a hub for a "parse for dummies" document -- a document that explores parse in all its depth and may have many code examples embedded within it. A few things could be in either or both. For example, I have a (not yet finished) "industrial strength" logging script (handles all sorts of error conditions and stuff) which I worked up from a one-liner. Plus I have all the notes of why each change and complication was added. That could be a script Library entry with a fully documented rationale, or a documentation project entry on error trapping and real-world event handling with a full script development history. Good luck with the documentation project, guys! Sunanda.

 [12/22] from: AJMartin:orcon at: 10-Aug-2003 22:13


Robert wrote:
> 6. Are there are any people that worked to create this Reblet? The words
data-file has this line:
> ;Thanks for inputs and suggestions from: > ;... Al.Bri_xtra.co.nz,...
[AJMartin--orcon--net--nz] (I've changed ISPs.) Andrew J Martin ICQ: 26227169 http://www.rebol.it/Valley/ http://valley.orcon.net.nz/ http://Valley.150m.com/

 [13/22] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 10-Aug-2003 12:26


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> The documentation wiki idea looks like yet another forking in > this area. Did Robert have a look at the R.E.P. site?
Hi, I had several looks at the WiKi but to be honest, I seem to be too dumb to use it. I never understood how to navigate it efficently and find what I'm looking for... Maybe others have the same problem. The idea of a WiKi is good but for me it needs to be streamlined. I don't want to browse around without a clear structure, I can't track it all the time to understand the structure chnage and evolvement over time etc. It's a bit too chaotic for me to use it... Robert

 [14/22] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 10-Aug-2003 12:29


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
> > ;... Al.Bri_xtra.co.nz,... > [AJMartin--orcon--net--nz] (I've changed ISPs.)
Ok. Andrew, what was your part of the script? Can you give us some information? Robert

 [15/22] from: SunandaDH:aol at: 10-Aug-2003 9:54


Hi Ladislav :
> It is a pity that the library team tries to duplicate the functionality.
I don't see it as duplication. I see it as diversification. The REBOL world is large enough (and growing still I hope) for more than one approach, and more than one experiment at promoting and spreading REBOL. When Carl called for volunteers to revamp the Library back last August, I responded because I saw it as a valuable way to promote REBOL and make it more available. What I regret is that I've had so little time to work on the Library, so we have been slow in releasing some of the improvements we have waiting to be coded. But I'm very happy that other sites and other approaches exist and are up and running. We can all learn from each other. The library will have features for organizing and cataloging and searching scripts that would be hard to replicate in a wiki. A wiki offers greater immediate access for adding unstructured information. it's good to have these -- and Altme and RebolPlanet and CodeConscious and whoever I've just offended by not mentioning their site -- as places to consider publishing scripts. Sunanda.

 [16/22] from: andrew:martin:colenso:school at: 11-Aug-2003 9:05


Hi, Robert. IIRC, I wrote in some comments on some functions. The Reblet was written by Carl, I believe, to get the documentation for the PDF, IIRC. I didn't much like using it because it was Rebol/View text editor which was more difficult to use. If I was designing a replacement, I'd be using a Wiki system writing to text files. Andrew J Martin Attendance Officer & Information Systems Trouble Shooter Colenso High School Arnold Street, Napier. Tel: 64-6-8310180 ext 826 Fax: 64-6-8336759 http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM http://www.colenso.school.nz/

 [17/22] from: andrew:martin:colenso:school at: 11-Aug-2003 10:04


Robert wrote:
> Ladislav wrote: > > The documentation wiki idea looks like yet another forking in
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
> structure change and evolvement over time etc. > It's a bit too chaotic for me to use it... Robert
I agree with Robert. Most Wikis, including the Vanilla REP site, are too hard to find information in. They tend to obscure information and don't allow the equivalent of viewing a directory listing in a file explorer. For example, most wikis won't allow viewing the contents of a directory or folder. Most wikis also show far too many controls to play with on each page, and so confuse the user with lots of options which don't mean much and aren't important, while important options are drowned out in the visual confusion. Most wikis disallow single word links and don't allow words with spaces, so requiring special ways around this problem which usually aren't documented! :) Andrew J Martin Attendance Officer & Information Systems Trouble Shooter Colenso High School Arnold Street, Napier. Tel: 64-6-8310180 ext 826 Fax: 64-6-8336759 http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM http://www.colenso.school.nz/ DISCLAIMER: Colenso High School and its Board of Trustees is not responsible (or legally liable) for materials distributed to or acquired from user e-mail accounts. You can report any misuse of an e-mail account to our ICT Manager and the complaint will be investigated. (Misuse can come in many forms, but can be viewed as any material sent/received that indicate or suggest pornography, unethical or illegal solicitation, racism, sexism, inappropriate language and/or other issues described in our Acceptable Use Policy.) All outgoing messages are certified virus-free by McAfee GroupShield Exchange 5.10.285.0 Phone: +64 6 843 5095 or Fax: +64 6 833 6759 or E-mail: [postmaster--colenso--school--nz]

 [18/22] from: andrew:martin:colenso:school at: 11-Aug-2003 10:17


Andrew wrote:
> [Rant about most wikis.]
Of course, by "most", I don't mean "All". After all: http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM :) Andrew J Martin Attendance Officer & Information Systems Trouble Shooter Colenso High School Arnold Street, Napier. Tel: 64-6-8310180 ext 826 Fax: 64-6-8336759 http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM http://www.colenso.school.nz/ DISCLAIMER: Colenso High School and its Board of Trustees is not responsible (or legally liable) for materials distributed to or acquired from user e-mail accounts. You can report any misuse of an e-mail account to our ICT Manager and the complaint will be investigated. (Misuse can come in many forms, but can be viewed as any material sent/received that indicate or suggest pornography, unethical or illegal solicitation, racism, sexism, inappropriate language and/or other issues described in our Acceptable Use Policy.) All outgoing messages are certified virus-free by McAfee GroupShield Exchange 5.10.285.0 Phone: +64 6 843 5095 or Fax: +64 6 833 6759 or E-mail: [postmaster--colenso--school--nz]

 [19/22] from: g:santilli:tiscalinet:it at: 11-Aug-2003 1:00


Hi Robert, On Sunday, August 10, 2003, 11:14:25 AM, you wrote: RMM> 6. Are there are any people that worked to create this Reblet? The words RMM> data-file has this line: RMM> ;Thanks for inputs and suggestions from: RMM> ;lmecir_mbox.vol.cz, allen_rebolforces.com, Al.Bri_xtra.co.nz, RMM> giesse_writeme.com I think that's the list of people that contributed comments. [giesse--writeme--com] was me, you can see a couple comments on some words by me. Regards, Gabriele. -- Gabriele Santilli <[g--santilli--tiscalinet--it]> -- REBOL Programmer Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila --- SOON: http://www.rebol.it/

 [20/22] from: brett:codeconscious at: 11-Aug-2003 10:12


> Of course, by "most", I don't mean "All". After all: > http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM > > :)
HTTP 404 - File not found Umm - are you sure you're your not imagining the exception? :^) Regards, Brett

 [21/22] from: andrew:martin:colenso:school at: 11-Aug-2003 12:35


Internal network. :) (Our network guy is paranoid about security.) Andrew J Martin Attendance Officer & Information Systems Trouble Shooter Colenso High School Arnold Street, Napier. Tel: 64-6-8310180 ext 826 Fax: 64-6-8336759 http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM http://www.colenso.school.nz/

 [22/22] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 10-Aug-2003 19:49


>> It is a pity that the library team tries to duplicate the functionality.
... Sac> The library will have features for organizing and cataloging and searching Sac> scripts that would be hard to replicate in a wiki. A wiki offers greater Sac> immediate access for adding unstructured information. it's good to have these -- and Sac> Altme and RebolPlanet and CodeConscious and whoever I've just offended by not Sac> mentioning their site -- as places to consider publishing scripts. Well said Sunanda and, Ladislav, I agree whole-heartedly that duplication is something we want to avoid. Hopefully each channel will offer different and complementary mechanisms and information. My brain hasn't yet been Wikified; I'm not even a big fan of web interfaces in general. If the information is out there in some form, hopefully can can all leverage it and to keep in touch so we avoid duplicating efforts. There will be some of course, but links between the various systems that may specialize in a particular type of information (articles, docs, etc.) may help reduce the fragmentation a bit. -- Gregg

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted