Oops. Obvious typo in that last email (my brain must have skipped a beat!) http://mit.udel.edu should have been http://simile.mit.edu
- John John Callahan wrote: > Thanks Jon for volunteering to help. From what I gather, it seems like > we're heading toward the following... > > http://www.simile-widgets.org (new site) > For the documentation wiki, examples, HowTo articles, links to > resources, etc.. This will be the virtual home, public face of these > projects. > > This means migrating/merging all the wiki and resource information from > http://simile.mit.edu/ (legacy site) and > http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/w/list (Google Code wiki) to the > new site. The primary intent of this thread is to figure out the best > way to do this. > > > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm thinking the new site will > include information for the SIMILE projects listed below. The legacy > site (http://mit.udel.edu) will continue to exist but only for projects > not migrated. It's likely that the wiki on Google Code would be > disabled. (Google Code would only be for svn access and issue tracking.) > > Exhibit, Timeline, Timeplot, Runway, Babel > > (I'm not against any other SIMILE project being migrated as well... that > would be up to the project author. IMO, if the source code is not going > to be updated then do not migrate it.) > > > The following already exist and likely will not change: > Code apis at http://api.simile-widgets.org/ > Email list/forum at http://groups.google.com/group/simile-widgets?hl=en > SVN repository at http://simile-widgets.googlecode.com/svn/ > Issue tracking at http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/issues/list > > - John > > > > Jon Crump wrote: > >> John et alia, >> >> I'd be happy to help. I confess, however, to some confusion over the >> 'legacy' site and the 'new' site: we seem to have three: MIT, Google, and >> simile-widgets.org. The documentation link in the latter (for timeline >> which is the widget I'm most familiar with) points to the wiki at google >> code. Is it proposed that the docs on the old site and on the google code >> site be merged into the simile-widgets.org site, or will we continue >> expanding the wiki at >> http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/wiki/Timeline ? >> >> In either case, if someone could add me to the wiki, there are some things >> I could help clarify there. >> >> Jon >> >> >> >> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, John Callahan wrote: >> >> >> >>> Is there anyone else willing to help with SIMILE documentation? I'd like to >>> get a few more people to ease the load on any one person. >>> >>> You can put in as little or as much time as you want. Every little bit >>> helps. And there are many ways to help, such as... >>> >>> 1) send out your thoughts or experiences in using other documentation sites >>> 2) send out your ideas on how the SIMILE docs and resources should be >>> organized/searched >>> 3) copy and paste content from the old legacy site to the new site >>> 4) add links to In the Wild sites, blog posts, etc.., about SIMILE projects >>> 5) create new reference documentation for existing functions >>> 6) post brief HowTo articles, case studies of how you're using the products, >>> FAQs, etc... >>> 7) post code snippets that accomplishes a particular task >>> >>> >>> Again, any of these can help. I'm thinking we can have an off-list >>> discussion on the overall architecture and documentation strategy very >>> soon. If you would like to be involved, at any level, just let me know. >>> Thanks. >>> >>> - John >>> >>> ************************************************** >>> John Callahan >>> Geospatial Application Developer >>> Delaware Geological Survey, University of Delaware >>> 227 Academy St, Newark DE 19716-7501 >>> Tel: (302) 831-3584 >>> Email: [email protected] >>> http://www.dgs.udel.edu >>> ************************************************** >>> >>> >>> >>> Gmail wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I'm also willing to volunteer. Assisted by Stefano; I completed moving >>> the legacy issues for Exhibit and Timeline to Google code after Easter. >>> So there are two sources to include in the strategy and planning: >>> - information assets contained in the issues and resolution >>> - following the excellent technical support demonstrates that "key >>> threads" often play an important part in resolution. Hence a >>> categorization and listing of these threads would enhance productivity. >>> >>> BTW, is there another source of documentation for the API's? I searched >>> for documentation on the HTML table importer but could find only the >>> code in the API source. Is there a documentation reference as well? >>> >>> I would invest some time to move, collect, or document the legacy >>> material and help develop the future references. Put me into the team >>> planning. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Gary Gabriel >>> >>> John Callahan wrote: >>> >>> >>> That is exactly where all of this is headed. I'm willing to volunteer >>> (and help coordinate) as well. Maybe we can get a handful of people >>> together, develop a strategy, and start populating with content. >>> >>> From what I know... >>> >>> All documentation should be at http://www.simile-widgets.org >>> Examples, HowTo articles, links to resources also at >>> http://www.simile-widgets.org >>> Code apis should be at http://api.simile-widgets.org/ >>> Email list/forum at http://groups.google.com/group/simile-widgets?hl=en >>> SVN repository at http://simile-widgets.googlecode.com/svn/ >>> Issue tracking at http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/issues/list >>> >>> >>> IMO, It's be great to remove docs/resources form the old legacy site and >>> remove some of the components (wiki, download) from the Google site. >>> >>> - John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> mleden wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Along similar lines, it would be great to see the "SIMILE online >>> content" consolidated to the degree possible. >>> >>> Right now, as I understand it, we have 3 main sources: >>> 1. The "legacy site": http://simile.mit.edu >>> 2. The "current site": http://www.simile-widgets.org >>> 3. The "Google site": http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/ >>> >>> We've all seen lots of confusion on this message board about where to >>> go for what. I find myself bouncing around between the three. >>> >>> At a minimum, it would be great to have any remaining content copied >>> from the "legacy site" to the "current site". The "legacy site" URL >>> could simply auto-forward to the "current site". I'm guessing the >>> major benefit of using the "Google site" is for the development tools >>> (source code control, issue tracking, etc). I presume that this might >>> be a little trickier to consolidate (into the "current site"). >>> >>> As of right now, I can dedicate some time to any of the documentation/ >>> housekeeping efforts (with a little direction). Just let me know >>> directly how/if I can help. >>> >>> -Mark >>> >>> >>> On Jun 4, 7:43 am, David Karger <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> John, I'm reasonably certain we've defaulted to (1) because both (2) and >>> (3) require more substantial coordination and management, which we >>> haven't been able to offer from within the simile team (too little >>> manpower). I doubt (2) could work since it requires all contributors to >>> code a certain way. I'd love to see (3) but that requires some people >>> to step forward to join the doc team. >>> >>> John Callahan wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Before I went ahead and started making suggestions about if SIMILE needs >>> a CMS vs a wiki site, I should have stepped back and asked what the >>> overall documentation strategy is. I should have probably also asked if >>> there were previous discussions about community building plans and how >>> things have gone the past few years. Sorry about that. So, I started >>> this new thread. :-) >>> >>> What is the overall documentation strategy? >>> >>> 1) complete community contributed documentation in a wiki/CMS, including >>> api references, examples, and HowTo articles. This seems to be where we >>> are now. >>> >>> 2) dynamically derived documentation from the code itself (could use >>> Natural Docs,http://www.naturaldocs.org/or similar, e.g., >>> http://dev.openlayers.org/releases/OpenLayers-2.7/doc/apidocs/files/O...) >>> This would require the authors to add much more info the code. >>> Community would contribute examples and general articles. >>> >>> 3) select a documentation team to create api reference and other >>> FAQs/important info. (could use Sphinx,http://sphinx.pocoo.org/or >>> similar, from restructured text, e.g., >>> http://mapserver.org/documentation.html) Community would again >>> contribute examples and general articles but under the guidelines of the >>> doc team. >>> >>> And I'm sure there are many others. Has this been previously discussed >>> or decided upon? Any thoughts on best approaches? >>> >>> - John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SIMILE Widgets" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/simile-widgets?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
