Hi Josiah, I am new to TW but have intent to develop it into "P2P Collective Intelligence" platform. The major purpose of P2PCI is to have any topics of interest found or discovered "in real-time" for reuse. "Real-time" means 20-30 seconds per any particular topic is demonstrated/measured, that is 2-3 times slower than a theoretical limit. I *started* putting together "the documentation" with the "core node" probably here: http://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/w/page/114001012/TiddlyWiki%20Best%20Practices The "documentation" is JUST STARTED. However, you may have an idea how it will look like in future by browsing around: - click "Taxonomy Path" to see the place of any particular page in the LikeInMind Taxonomy. - click "Visual Taxonomy" link to see the Taxonomy graph being built on DebateGraph website. - feel free to explore the pages by clicking the other links in the pages. That will give you an idea how information is organised on LikeInMind and how it can be reliably discovered.
Let me talk about advanced "real-time" search techniques later. That is a big topic on it's own. Later, we should also talk about the "Death of the Document", place of browsing vs search of particular topics, publishing on forums vs QA sites vs "knowledge networks", etc. Thank you for your interest, Dmitry On Saturday, 17 December 2016 07:56:50 UTC+13, Josiah wrote: > > Ciao Tobias > > Sorry for the delay. I been busy. I wish I had replied before because this > thread looks like its gone "off the boil". Which, from my point of view, is > unfortunate. > > Like many of the other posts in this discussion I find myself both > agreeing & disagreeing . > > I AGREE with you on TWO core things ... > > 1 - Some of the best DOCUMENTATION is written or curated by people > dedicated to that task, not mixed up with anything else. YOUR work is an > outstanding example of that. In no way do I want to detract from that fact. > > 2 - Google Groups as an ongoing DISCUSSION FORUM is as good as any > other. The fact it supports both web & email, & that it is reliable, gives > it a real "bedrock". > > Where I DIFFER somewhat is as follows ... > > A - Google Groups loses its own history constantly. Its best at > transient knowledge, very good for the thread at hand. Then, basically, its > past. > > B - Multiple forums across the net instantiate what I should probably > properly call "proto-documentation", rather than "Documentation" with a big > "D". But not here. This type of documentation is accessible ONLY where > there is ORGANISATION for longevity. > > To give an example from THIS group where GG fails badly. > TWEDERATION orientation & documentation exists as much in the Google Group > archive as it does on TW sites. And BOTH of them are REFRACTORY TO FINDING > because the way GG works makes it extremely cumbersome. Even if you KNOW to > look for them. Which you WON'T unless you have been reading everything. > That goes for BOTH the docu-discussion AND the site addresses for the > plugin. Pinning & Tagging would better enable that. A supplementary wiki on > critical developments directly connected to such threads even more so. > > C - What Riz has been doing on Reddit, just as one person with limited > technical scope & time, has really impressed upon me that we could be doing > MUCH BETTER. That is a lot to do with Reddit having searchable tagging of > posts, & posters. AND supplementary wikis built in. > > That is NOT so unusual. What is unusual is we persist with GG even > though its CHOPPING OFF emergent directions everyday because it has NO > interest in valuing history. > > All this is perhaps not about "documentation" in the stricter sense you > meant it. But, from a practical point of view its still highly relevant. > > Best wishes > Josiah > > > On Monday, 12 December 2016 19:49:28 UTC+1, Tobias Beer wrote: >> >> Hi Josiah, >> >> >>> Its worth noting a MAJOR theme is the discussion was we are losing >>> valuable documentation all the time by not having an organised way to look >>> at past threads. TAGs might help, at least as an interim. >>> >> >> Please keep in mind that discussing a subject matter and responding with >> answers to highly specific requests is not at all the same as >> "documentation". From what I see, reddit does not provide a knowledge base, >> whereas TiddlyWiki.com very well has a splash of that. >> >> I think it is crucial for documentation to be curated, not just accrued. >> You can argue that there's a learning curve to both contributing as well as >> a latency to updates to tiddlywiki.com, but I would argue the quality >> and consistency that brings are very much of need. A more or less lose >> community built around another platform will quickly evolve into something >> that may or may not actually be so much about TiddlyWiki. >> >> You see, Google groups does one thing and it does that good: provide a >> platform for timely discussion. That is its purpose and it fulfills it. To >> me, extracting documentation for presentation and consumption elsewhere is >> an entirely different, ideally curated process. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Tobias. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/8ff84da6-2a52-48e4-a55c-81b5683e8295%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
