Hi all,

Further to the discussion in the faq thread, I've installed a copy of
WordPress for the group to try out.

You can access it he
http://diyfaq.org.uk/wpress/

There's information on the homepage on how to login. Have a play, post
some stuff, and discuss the suitability of this cms for the purpose we
have in mind. If people don't like this particular app, and would prefer
a more wiki style app, please say so and I'll install a test wiki.


--
Grunff

Grunff wrote:

Further to the discussion in the faq thread, I've installed a copy of
WordPress for the group to try out.

You can access it he
http://diyfaq.org.uk/wpress/

There's information on the homepage on how to login. Have a play, post
some stuff, and discuss the suitability of this cms for the purpose we
have in mind. If people don't like this particular app, and would prefer
a more wiki style app, please say so and I'll install a test wiki.

Just had a quick play. I made a comment on there but thought it best to
re-iterate here - presumably we don't want discussion/comment in two
places in parallel??

Anyway... my point was that I’m not sure what the point of the Wordpress
interface is - wouldn’t it just end up being a replacement or
alternative version of uk.d-i-y? As far as the test categories on the
right-hand side of the Wordpress screen go - well, don’t they equate to
“uk.d-i-y.general” “uk.d-i-y.home” and “uk.d-i-y.pushfit”; and the
majority of uk.d-i-y punters regularly reject the concept of subdividing
the ng? I think I feel a Wiki would be better; but I don't know how you
solve the inevitable edit-wars issues.

David

Lobster wrote:

Anyway... my point was that I’m not sure what the point of the Wordpress
interface is - wouldn’t it just end up being a replacement or
alternative version of uk.d-i-y?

Different people will have different takes on this; here's mine.

I don't see the suggested content management/publishing system as in any
way a replacement for the newsgroup. In fact, I don't see it as a place
to have discussions at all, any more than the main FAQ is.

I see it as a platform for publishing articles - these could be reviews,
how-tos, collections of links to other useful resources etc.

Perhaps one reason it looks like some kind of discussion forum is
because of the comments that one can post below an article. I thought
this would be a useful feature, but we can simply turn it off. That
would leave a simple article publishing system, where you log in,
publish an article, and place it in the relevant category.


As far as the test categories on the
right-hand side of the Wordpress screen go - well, don’t they equate to
“uk.d-i-y.general” “uk.d-i-y.home” and “uk.d-i-y.pushfit”; and the
majority of uk.d-i-y punters regularly reject the concept of subdividing
the ng?

Again, my take - the categories are just a way of organising the
articles - they aren't there for discussions.


I think I feel a Wiki would be better; but I don't know how you
solve the inevitable edit-wars issues.

This is the one thing that worries me most about a real wiki. My
preference is that whatever publishing platform we use, an author should
be the only person with editorial control over their articles. How do
others feel about this?


--
Grunff

Grunff wrote:
Lobster wrote:

Anyway... my point was that I'm not sure what the point of the Wordpress
interface is - wouldn't it just end up being a replacement or
alternative version of uk.d-i-y?

Different people will have different takes on this; here's mine.

I don't see the suggested content management/publishing system as in any
way a replacement for the newsgroup. In fact, I don't see it as a place
to have discussions at all, any more than the main FAQ is.

I see it as a platform for publishing articles - these could be reviews,
how-tos, collections of links to other useful resources etc.

Perhaps one reason it looks like some kind of discussion forum is
because of the comments that one can post below an article. I thought
this would be a useful feature, but we can simply turn it off. That
would leave a simple article publishing system, where you log in,
publish an article, and place it in the relevant category.


As far as the test categories on the
right-hand side of the Wordpress screen go - well, don't they equate to
"uk.d-i-y.general" "uk.d-i-y.home" and "uk.d-i-y.pushfit"; and the
majority of uk.d-i-y punters regularly reject the concept of subdividing
the ng?

Again, my take - the categories are just a way of organising the
articles - they aren't there for discussions.


I think I feel a Wiki would be better; but I don't know how you
solve the inevitable edit-wars issues.

This is the one thing that worries me most about a real wiki. My
preference is that whatever publishing platform we use, an author should
be the only person with editorial control over their articles. How do
others feel about this?

Thanks for putting a tester up for us.

I've got 2 comments, and they may both seem trivial, but I do think
they matter.

First I couldnt see how to read the articles, so nor will many new
visitors, and this is an issue as it stands. Presentation not
technology of course.

2nd everyone is familar with wiki and knows how to use one. This isnt
so with the test site.


NT

wrote:

I've got 2 comments, and they may both seem trivial, but I do think
they matter.

First I couldnt see how to read the articles, so nor will many new
visitors, and this is an issue as it stands. Presentation not
technology of course.

2nd everyone is familar with wiki and knows how to use one. This isnt
so with the test site.


Ok, I will leave WordPress up there, and install a wiki. I'll try to get
this done later today.


--
Grunff

wrote in message
ups.com...
2nd everyone is familar with wiki and knows how to use one.

Pretty presumptious. I'd guess that nine out of ten people posting here
haven't heeard of a wiki..

As far as I'm concerned uk.d-i-y is perfect as-is.

NT

Paul Andrews wrote:

As far as I'm concerned uk.d-i-y is perfect as-is.

I think I should clarify a couple of things - a statement like that
makes me think that perhaps some people have misunderstood what we're
discussing.

Like you, I think uk.d-i-y is perfect as it is - as a discussion medium.
It's a great format for having threaded discussions. However, it is an
awful format for publishing permanent articles. I know Google (and Deja
before it) does a great job of archiving the content, but it doesn't
present you with a nice set of easily navigable, searchable articles -
it presents you with lots of threaded discussions.

What we're talking about is setting up an article publishing system that
allows multiple contributers to contribute content. This would not be a
place for diy discussions, it would be a repository of knowledge, with
the content maintained by the authors.


--
Grunff

wrote:

2nd everyone is familar with wiki and knows how to use one. This isnt
so with the test site.

Ok, I've set up a wiki. After installing and trying out 8 different
ones, I came to the conclusion that MediaWiki (which is used by
Wikipedia) is way ahead of the rest. Here it is:

http://wiki.symworks.com/

I had to install it on a different server; the server on which the faq
resides doesn't have all the required modules.

Play away, and post your thoughts.


--
Grunff

Grunff wrote:
wrote:

2nd everyone is familar with wiki and knows how to use one. This isnt
so with the test site.

I suspect many people (like me) have used them for reference but never
written them from scratch though, or even edited them...

Ok, I've set up a wiki. After installing and trying out 8 different
ones, I came to the conclusion that MediaWiki (which is used by
Wikipedia) is way ahead of the rest. Here it is:

http://wiki.symworks.com/

I had to install it on a different server; the server on which the faq
resides doesn't have all the required modules.

Play away, and post your thoughts.

Great stuff!

But 'scuse the ignorance: how does it get started off? doesn't it need a
shell or template or something rather than a blank canvas?

Is there a good general numpty guide somewhere?!

David

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:16:55 +0000, Grunff wrote:

Ok, I've set up a wiki. After installing and trying out 8 different
ones, I came to the conclusion that MediaWiki (which is used by
Wikipedia) is way ahead of the rest. Here it is:

http://wiki.symworks.com/

Thanks grunff that's great!

Play away, and post your thoughts.

OK I've put up an article I've been knocking up on DHW systems.
Please feel free to read & edit....

(search for Hot Water - there doesn't seem to be an article index)

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:16:55 +0000, Grunff wrote:

wrote:

2nd everyone is familar with wiki and knows how to use one. This isnt
so with the test site.

Ok, I've set up a wiki. After installing and trying out 8 different
ones, I came to the conclusion that MediaWiki (which is used by
Wikipedia) is way ahead of the rest. Here it is:

http://wiki.symworks.com/

I had to install it on a different server; the server on which the faq
resides doesn't have all the required modules.

Play away, and post your thoughts.

Just thought it might be worthwhile wikifying the normal FAQ or
splitting it into separate articles to kick this off?

I'm convinced a wiki is the right way to go but you need to tie down
user rights as well as the system allows i.e anonymous edits aren't
ever allowed and every user has to provide a verifiable email address.
A group of sysops, preferably prolific (useful) contributors from here
would need to be appointed to stamp down on any Dribble/Bacon/Firth
type content that might sneak through.

While this site is not DIY related this url shows what can be done
with a wiki that doesn't look too much like wikipedia (it's running
standard mediawiki)

http://www.350z-tech.com/zwiki/Main_Page


--