Kay - disagreeing once was enough ... so:
I share your thoughts about the wiki !
However, the dynamics of Wikipedia are an interesting issue and
relate to 'vandalism'.
Being a small contributor to the Greek Wiki, which has far less
subscribers than the English one,
I can see that the dynamics do not work well. People can sneak in
loads of crap, that are unlikely to be read
and corrected by an expert, due to the smaller number of contributors.
Since there are less crystallographers that Greeks, I would conclude,
that the English Wiki dynamics can not be taken for granted.
So, some thought might need be given not to 'security' but if you
prefer 'access rights'.
People at CCP4 should (I guess are) thinking for moderation, access
rights to types of articles etc.
For hierarchies, parallel efforts, GPL, I agree. ;-)
Tassos
PS Kay, your digital signature has some trouble for me - cant read it
- you may want to know.
On Jul 27, 2007, at 11:14, Kay Diederichs wrote:
Kevin Cowtan schrieb:
Yes, that is our intention. CCP4 would probably be at the third
level of a hierarchy including:
Macromolecular crystallographic techniques
Structure solution, analysis and visualisation software
The CCP4 suite
Kevin,
why does/will/should the CCP4 Wiki have a hierarchy at all? I
thought that the structure of the Wiki emerges from the links
between the articles.
As far as I know the MediaWiki software does not even support a
hierarchy (but of course I may be wrong, and other software might
support it).
And why are you concerned about security? In what sense? Breakins
into the computer that runs the software, or vandalism of articles?
I believe the first point is best dealt with by setting up a
virtual machine dedicated to the Wiki, and running an OS that gets
automatic security updates for a number of years. The "vandalism"
thing is probably less of an issue than it is in Wikipedia - but
even at the Wikipedia scale it can be handled well, it seems.
One other thing that I thought about has to do with permissions.
Let me explain. The easiest way to come up with useful articles
would probably be to just write summaries citing people's emails to
the CPP4BB. Citing Eleanor's postings alone would certainly produce
a great Wiki! But - is it appropriate/allowed to cite people's old
emails to the CCP4BB on the Wiki, without their consent? I for one
would certainly give permission to cite my earlier CCP4BB postings,
provided they are cited in the proper context.
And finally: why is there a concern by some people about the
"premature" setup of a Wiki, like the one that was set up by Artem?
If the articles in a Wiki are good they can just be copied over to
the "CCP4 Wiki" when it exists. At least that is my understanding
concerning Wikipedia articles - you can just use them under the GNU
Free Documentation License.
thanks,
Kay
So there would be room for other software packages at the same
level as CCP4, and things like purification and crystallisation
off of the top level.
James Stroud wrote:
Would a "CCP4 wiki" be different from a general crystallography
wiki? Would it reflect, for instance, the breadth of topics on
the CCP4BB?
On Monday 23 July 2007 09:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Contributions from volunteers to establish and maintain the CCP4
wiki will
be definitely appreciated.
