Dave said: Don't we want as many people as possible involved in wiki media development? >
Well... do we? Maybe not? And maybe we don't want a Wiki that bears little or no resemblance to other MediaWikis... I think this question is worth considering.. will more chickens in the coup make it better? Or will this initial barrier help ensure the right people like a type of initiation ceremony.. I think about this question when I compare wikis with WYSIWYG with Wikimedia Foundation wikis that apparently lack such a feature.. from where I sit, it appears that the Wikimedia Wikis like Wikipedia, Books, Species etc win hands down.. why is that? But that question aside, a simple and improved WYSIWYG would still be good to see.. if only to test the idea that having it will improve the Wiki.. On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:21 AM, David McQuillan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Brent, > > You say "I still just don't get this whole argument..." > > The argument that I and others have made is that it's in the best interest > of WikiEducator & all wikis really to reduce and eliminate where possible > any barriers to participation. Any barrier will act to reduce > participation. Don't we want as many people as possible involved in wiki > media development? > > I don't think that taking the attitude of "if you can't be bothered > spending [the time needed], then I guess you just miss half of the > revolution -- sorry" is particularly constructive. Wikis are not the > revolution. They're only one of the open-content platforms that are out > there. If they don't meet the evolving needs of consumers, then they will > fall by the wayside. > > D > > >>> Brent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/21/08 8:10 PM >>> > its not a bad idea ... Alexander Hayes and I tried this once though and it > was harder than it seemed to locate icons for half of the wiki things that > were there, but it would be worth another shot. Perhaps a good graphic > designer and a bit of feedback from the community could make a page on the > wiki for experimentation. It's pretty easy to swap them in and out if you > have access so we could set up a test wiki somewhere and give it a go. > > I still just don't get this whole argument and it often makes me just > think, > well ... if you can't be bothered spending all of about 3 hours to get a > grip on the basic basic basic (did I emphasize how basic this is?) syntax, > then I guess you just miss half of the revolution -- sorry. You can just > be > a consumer. You want to be on the bus then take the pill mate, otherwise > ... > get out of the way. > > brent. > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Leigh Blackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > The WYSIWYG that is already in all MediaWikis just needs a little > > tweaking. The icons it uses are way weird! Is there any way we can get > in > > there and change the icons so that they are more in tune with the > majority > > of other WYSIWYG? And then, when we click the WYSIWYG icons, how about > the > > syntax that is placed be just a little more helpful.. such as when > making a > > link, we highlight the text and then click the weird link icon. It adds > [] > > around the word. What it needs is some red text that says: *add your > link > > here*. in red so we can't miss it. I reckon that would be a good > > compromise, where drained newbies can avoid pure editing, but by using > the > > icons they gradually come to appreciate and learn straight syntax. > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jim Tittsler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 1:33 PM, James Neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > i've found that the OO Writer MW export works nicely for converting > > > > existing documents into markup - but its not much good for live > > > editing, nor > > > > is OO it something that your average teacher is familiar with > > > > > > Yes, there is a difference between authoring and editing. Once the > > > round-trip is possible, I think "editing" will be more practical. I > > > also think that once you have the basic structure, editing a bit here > > > and there in wiki format is not as off-putting. You've got lots of > > > examples at hand. > > > > > > And it can be done without constant connectivity. > > > > > > (Gee, average teachers don't seem familiar with much in this domain. > :-) > > > > > > > this is possibly where moodle will win out in situations where a MW > > > install > > > > or WV/WE could have been used > > > > > > I don't quite follow this. The typical Moodle's htmlArea seems more > > > frustrating than learning a bit of wiki markup. I guess there are > > > different frustration thresholds. > > > > > > And now that there are baby steps in exporting WE content in content > > > package form, you can gain the benefit of collaborative editing but > > > still allow deployment in legacy LMSes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Leigh Blackall > > +64(0)21736539 > > skype - leigh_blackall > > SL - Leroy Goalpost > > http://learnonline.wordpress.com > > > > > > > > > > -- > -------------------------------- > http://digitalsynapse.co.nz > http://greymatter.co.nz > -------------------------------- > > > > > > > -- -- Leigh Blackall +64(0)21736539 skype - leigh_blackall SL - Leroy Goalpost http://learnonline.wordpress.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" 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/wikieducator?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
