Include in WikiDocs (Was: Improving the UI to encourage better data)
|
View:
New views
6 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
 |
|
|
|
RE: Include in WikiDocs (Was: Improving the UI toencourage better data)
by Cristov Russell
::
Rate this Message:
> On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 14:02:01 +0200, Cristov Russell wrote:
> > > Probably the best way to do this is WikiDocs but it may > mean carefully > > splitting some docs into subpages and using include macros > [1] (I've > > just come across it now so I don't know if it's the right solution) > > for the "main" page. It minimum it would mean very stable > structure in > > pages used for WikiDocs but that's already under way. > > Just a short note: Include does not work in WikiDocs. > > This is a very simple internal restriction: The Include macro > fetches the most *current* text that matches, to be WikiDocs > compatible, it would need to fetch text from a version > specified in the macro on the calling page. > > It might be possible to patch moin to allow this, but I am > not sure the Moin maintainers would accept it. Alternatively > someone could implement an enhaced Include Macro component. > > DonRedman That's too bad. I think it would be preferably to leave these dynamic but if includes would not work it would mean creating and maintaining separate documents. I still think this preferable to what we currently have. The whole discussion around voting no to edits without release information is just another indicator of my original argument here; zout wants to get people's attention to get more information. If the editor had been encouraged to give this information or add a note as to why they weren't giving it, zout would not be resorting to a less than IMO desirable method of asking for more info. -- Cristov (wolfsong) If there are no stupid questions, then what sort of questions do stupid people ask? Dogbert _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-experts mailing list Musicbrainz-experts@... http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-experts |
|
|
Re: Include in WikiDocs (Was: Improving the UI toencourage better data)
by DonRedman
::
Rate this Message:
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 02:25:36 +0200, Cristov Russell wrote:
> The whole discussion around voting no to edits without release > information > is just another indicator of my original argument here; zout wants to get > people's attention to get more information. If the editor had been > encouraged to give this information or add a note as to why they weren't > giving it, zout would not be resorting to a less than IMO desirable > method > of asking for more info. Oops, hve I misunderstood you? Are you suggesting to include small portions of wiki text into static pages? This is possible and actually the next big step Rob and me planned for WikiDocs. I was referring to includes of wiki text into another wiki page which gets transcluded as WikiDocs. This is not possible without patching or an enhanced Include macro. DonRedman -- Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages: Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation around! :-) _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-experts mailing list Musicbrainz-experts@... http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-experts |
|
|
Re: Include in WikiDocs (Was: Improving the UI toencourage better data)
by Alexander Dupuy
::
Rate this Message:
Don Redman wrote:
> Are you suggesting to include small portions of wiki text into static > pages? This is possible and actually the next big step Rob and me > planned for WikiDocs. > > I was referring to includes of wiki text into another wiki page which > gets transcluded as WikiDocs. This is not possible without patching > or an enhanced Include macro. So the idea is to take a current wiki style page and split it into subpages; these subpages would be transcluded into wikidocs pages that would be embedded into the user interface at relevant locations to provide "inline help" at the point where it is needed. On the Wiki side, the subpages would be Include()d using the Moin macro, thereby presenting (more or less) the same overall structure as they had before being split up into smaller chunks for inline embedding. Is this a correct summary of the idea for the next stage of WikiDocs? @alex _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-experts mailing list Musicbrainz-experts@... http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-experts |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Include in WikiDocs (Was: Improving the UI toencourage better data)
by DonRedman
::
Rate this Message:
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 17:33:32 +0200, Alexander Dupuy wrote:
> Don Redman wrote: > >> Are you suggesting to include small portions of wiki text into static >> pages? This is possible and actually the next big step Rob and me >> planned for WikiDocs. >> >> I was referring to includes of wiki text into another wiki page which >> gets transcluded as WikiDocs. This is not possible without patching or >> an enhanced Include macro. > > > So the idea is to take a current wiki style page and split it into > subpages; these subpages would be transcluded into wikidocs pages that > would be embedded into the user interface at relevant locations to > provide "inline help" at the point where it is needed. Yes, ecxept that the splitting causes problems (see below). Maybe the transclusion mechanism could use the MoinMoin Include() code and only transclude part of the page? This way we could leave the wiki page intact. Hmm, but Moin is in Python and MBserver in perl... > On the Wiki side, the subpages would be Include()d using the Moin macro, > thereby presenting (more or less) the same overall structure as they had > before being split up into smaller chunks for inline embedding. This aspect is difficult for two reasons: Using include within the wiki would prohibit to use this text in other WikiDocs cases. The *including* page could not be transcludes as WikiDocs for the reasons I outlined in my previous mail. The other reason has more to do with wiki nature. A wiki page is not just a piece of text, but a piece of text *in a context* (hence my endless quest for intertwingling). if you take this text out of the context it is used in on the wiki, and transclude it into toher context, you get problems. Robert and my initial idea was to create a sub-wiki (sub pages within wiki.mb.org) which is explicitly dedicated to providing text for the website. Thus both within the wiki and as transcluded pages the text would have the same context. Technically I think something like this makes sense: A page like WebSiteWikiText (better WikiName, anyone?). A subpage of this one for each context on the website, like AddAlbum. And then sub-subpages with the text that gets transcluded, like BadCapitalizationWarning or TrackTimeInfo. The root page would serve as description of the project and entry page to it, the sub-pages would serve as discussion grounds and the sub-sub pages would host the text which emerges from the discussions. Is this feasible? What about caching, i.e is this scalable? DonRedman -- Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages: Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation around! :-) _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-experts mailing list Musicbrainz-experts@... http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-experts |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
