I only have a *little time* available in coming weeks, but are keen to
proceed.
*My carefully considered response to this thread.*
I think there is furious agreement what must be done, and there will always
be differences on how. Because the how is difficult to answer, enthusiastic
contributors build their own "repositories" and unfortunately get left to
administer them on their own. Separate repositories means people have to
look for them or visit each to acquire the information they need and they
are at the behest of the repository designer for the value of search and
indexing provided in that repository. These repositories are very valuable
but they remain a little isolated.
Owners of such private repositories need to be squirrels collecting
relevant info that fits the scope of the repositories often unstated
purpose. Some community members will suggest suitable information however
it is usually the owners responsibility to collect the "nuts". When an
owner has less time the nuts grow old and some go off and the repository
looses some value. The prospect of bringing it up to date feels like a
chore, and if you have no idea of its value to others and the number of
visitors it could be hard to build motivation to revisit it.
We could all dream of an ultimate repository of all things tiddlywiki but
is it even achievable?, if it is it will only be in time and participation.
The best way to start is build a hybrid environment of centralised records
that document the decentralised records. This environment need the
following qualities as its key features;
- Easy for anyone to contribute to
- A structure that forces curation, organization on contributions so as
to extract maximum value from the least effort and avoid admin overheads
- Easy to reference external resources
- The ability to discuss and contribute to the material on the site
- An opportunity to leverage tiddlywiki as much as possible
- Ability to build a team of enthusiasts to maintain and grow the
community resources.
Like any smart project the best effort should be expended up front to
structure the solution effectively, rather than on an ad hoc basis. The
danger of ad hoc which we are all familiar is fragments, overlapping
material, gaps and duplications, and perhaps worst of all confusion and
fragmentation.
In fact tiddlywiki itself could inspire this fragmentation because it has
many object, and components within it.
The only solution in my view is using an analysis process to determine the
pieces we want to collect together as a community and synthesis to build a
unified view of the pieces. The solution needs to keep this modularisation
from the analysis process alive so contributions can be made by the
community at any level. A small configuration detail, a code fragment
through to plugins and whole wiki editions. The solution will bring
together all the pieces in a consistent browsable and searchable whole,
however as it evolves it will be pointing to many external resources so the
ability to provide excerpts or keywords against external resources should
make those resources more findable.
In time enthusiasts will most likely migrate these external resources into
the central community resource where others can help maintain it and add
value. The beauty of tiddlywiki will also allow people to download and
export content as needed.
I will proceed given sufficient support and acknowledgement!
What do I need Initially?,
- sufficient support and acknowledgement!
- A degree of authority to proceed and run with my design strategy
- Of course I always remain open to criticism and alternative
perspectives, but I will not let it cripple the process
- This is evolution not revolution
I would like people with one or more of the following!
- Those with Knowledge and Information management skills
- Database design and management skills
- Strong User interface skills
- Lived experience with tiddlywiki
- Some enthusiastic reviewers and contributors
- Team or collaboration experts
We also need a set of collaboration tools, we can pick from available ones,
no need for permanent solutions.
Your thoughts?
Your support?
If you want to know more about HOW I plan to do this, if what I have said
in my posts in this thread is not enough join the team.
Regards
Tony
Regards
Tony
On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 4:53:25 AM UTC+10, Mohammad wrote:
>
> Example of high quality documentation prepared by community (procedure and
> how to)
>
> https://devguide.python.org/docquality/
>
>
> I think Tiddlywiki itself is best for nonlinear documentation while
> learning should be somehow linear a trail is needed
> So, the vanilla edition is not good for documentation, may be something
> like Sphinx or a TW edition with some linearity
> like the trail you see on TW-Scripts or similar ...
>
> --Mohammad
>
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/8ed3f087-07d2-49b8-8de7-c1812d16c788%40googlegroups.com.
