On 14 May 2003 at 8:52, John Sechrest wrote: (01)
I agree with everything you've written, John, except for the one
point below.
>
>
> I think that WikiWords vs [Wiki Words] is just syntactical sugar
> and really are not at issue.
I wonder, obviously, otherwise I wouldn't have asked the question.
Since people typing into wikis have to use extra syntax for
formatting, why not add a bit of extra syntax to pick out link
phrases in the parser (expanded wiki words with spaces included like,
"Something Interesting to Look at") e.g. %%Hot Topic%%, and then see
if it alters the way they play with the wiki?
(I would do that myself but I don't have a server and test subjects.) (02)
I'm also on a mission from the Plain English Commission, as you might
have guessed. ;) (03)
>
[...]
> As an illustration, for me it is not a problem to have a bunch
> of links on a page. Say 50. If they are spacially organized, it works
> for me. So the yahoo page style is fine. However I have employees who
> when the number of new links on a page exceeds 5-7, they get twitchy
> and want to re-write the page. It is a battle that I am loosing.
>
> So, some people can not keep the conceptual map in thier heads and
> they get twitchy with wikis. But the arbitrarily imposed structures of
> other packages often break or inhibit several kinds of structures.
>
> And people who are concrete thinkers really really have a hard
> time with wiki mapping.
>
> So...
>
> I think we can conclude:
>
> a) wiki's are not a structure for everyone
>
> b) There is room for improvement in support tools in wikis for
> organization and mangement of information
>
> c) Arbitrary rules for organization does not lead to more productive
> tools for everyone either.
>
> (you will notice that I am a list kinda guy, instead of the paragraph
> kinda guy)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Peter P. Jones" <ppj@concept67.fsnet.co.uk> writes:
>
> % This was a great post John.
> %
> % However, at the point where you started creating Wiki words for %
> concepts I dissented. So much information seems to be lost in that %
> process. % Not only that, but your resulting hypotheses seemed to
> indicate the % very problems I have been trying to generate some heat
> about. % % Bill Seitz proposed an impressive rescue attempt in %
> http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools- %
> yak&i=3EC1829A.2080707@fluxent.com % but I can't help feeling that if
> the original rich explanations of % matters were retained using
> ordinary language the error rate for % ingenious matching would go
> down; not to mention the notion that the % communicability of the
> information would go back up too. % % When I asked what Wikis were
> for a while back I was less concerned % with the idea that they
> organise information than with the notion % that there was an
> original agenda with Wikis that they improve % collaboration and
> communication. I've read about (though not really % experienced)
> serious projects where Wikis manifestly failed to % improve those
> aspects. % Question: Why does it seem that the results of using a
> Wiki are so % much harder to communicate than say, an ordinary
> book-style (basic % hierarchical tree with cross references) website?
> % % If it isn't the manner of organisation, could it be the Wiki
> words % system that is to blame? % (As you can probably tell my vote
> is 'yes' at present but I'm willing % to be swayed.) % % For example,
> Jack's NexistWiki killed off Wiki words (if I understood % Jack
> correctly) and proposed sets of organisational constraints for %
> certain modes of working. I didn't miss Wiki words at all, and the %
> site(s) seemed to have more power to get things achieved. And I %
> suspect the result will communicate well to others. % % I suppose
> what I'm asking is a bit like cost-benefit analysis. When % an
> enthusiastic group get their hands on a Wiki which curves go up % and
> which go down? % A knee-jerk take might be WeirdWord and WrongThink
> proliferation vs. % organisational effectiveness and ultimate
> communicability to wider % spheres, but I don't have enough
> experience on the use of Wikis for % serious projects to speak to
> that. % Maybe in the context of play Wikis are just good fun, but how
> % seriously should the resulting contents be taken? % % And given all
> that, are Wiki words really an improvement? % % (No doubt these
> matters have been discussed before somewhere...) % % -- % Peter % % %
> On 13 May 2003 at 14:42, John Sechrest wrote: % % > % > % > Jack Park
> <jackpark@thinkalong.com> writes: % > % > % > but if you can
> maintain that scope/context, then yes, things % > that % > are
> concepts should be wiki words. % > % > % Please expand on maintaing
> scope and context. % > % > When we look at any word, we are looking
> at it to represent % > a concept. (in this context) % > % > So I
> look at a word like: % > % > "cast" % > % > what does cast mean? %
> > % > % > 1. % > a. To throw (something, especially something
> light): The angler % > cast the line. b. To throw with force;
> hurl: waves that cast % > driftwood far up on the shore. See Synonyms
> at throw. % > % > 2. To shed; molt. % > 3. To throw forth;
> drop: cast anchor. % > 4. To throw on the ground, as in wrestling.
> % > 5. To deposit or indicate (a ballot or vote). % > 6. To
> turn or direct: All eyes were cast upon the speaker. % > 7. To
> cause to fall onto or over something or in a certain % > direction,
> as if by throwing: candles casting light; cast aspersions % > on my
> character; findings that cast doubt on our hypothesis. 8. To % >
> bestow; confer: 3The government I cast upon my brother2
> (Shakespeare). % > 9. a. To roll or throw (dice, for example).
> b. To draw % > (lots). % > % > 10. To give birth to prematurely:
> The cow cast a calf. % > 11. To cause (hunting hounds) to scatter
> and circle in search of a % > lost scent. 12. a. To choose
> actors for (a play, for example). b. % > To assign a certain role
> to (an actor): cast her as the lead. c. % > To assign an actor to
> (a part): cast each role carefully. % > % > 13. To form (liquid
> metal, for example) into a particular shape by % > pouring into a
> mold. 14. To give a form to; arrange: decided to cast % > the book
> in three parts. 15. To contrive; devise: cast a plan. 16. % > To
> calculate or compute; add up (a column of figures). 17. To % >
> calculate astrologically: cast my horoscope. 18. To warp; twist: %
> > floorboards cast by age. 19. Nautical. To turn (a ship); change
> to % > the opposite tack. % > % > % > % > when we look at these
> meanings, we see that what we really have % > is a whole collection
> of concepts, which overload the word % > "cast" % > % > So we might
> like to see things like: % > % > % > 12. a.To choose actors for =>
> TheaterCast % > b. To assign a certain role to an actor =>
> TheaterRoleCast % > % > 13. To form liquid metal => MetalCast % >
> 14. To give a form to; arrange => PlanningCast % > 19. Nautical.
> To turn (a ship) => NauticalNavigationCast % > % > % > And this would
> by choice of the wiki word, make things very much more % > specific.
> % > % > However, we find that we like to shorten things. We "know"
> that in the % > context of Metal working that "cast" has a specific
> use. % > % > And so we just toss in to the MetalWorkingWiki the word
> "cast" and % > assume the context. We do this with a lot of words. %
> > % > now, we find that we bring a whole bunch of people into a wiki
> % > converstation. And they are not coming from the same point of
> view. % > And we use words that in their context mean one thing and
> in this % > context mean another. % > % > this is why lots of people
> , expecially philophers get lost in % > definitions. % > % > (note:
> you can chase definitions too far, into meaninglessness) % > % >
> However, given that we have a concept and we want to name it, % > we
> need to understand the context. % > % > To broaden this issue, let's
> assume that I force my students % > to use a wiki for journaling in
> my class (which I do). % > % > I have a devil of a time explaining to
> them that they can not % > create a wiki word called MyJournal and
> expect it to work. % > the can not keep the context of things that
> are for "me" seperate from % > things that are for "my team" and that
> seperate from "the class" in % > the wiki. % > % > If they did it
> right, then they would have user-concept for things % > that were for
> them. And teamN-concept for things that were for their % > team. And
> then general theConceptGoesHere for the class wide global % >
> context. % > % > but this requires you to be explicit in your
> thinking. % > % > And few people do this. % > % > So I hypothosize
> that: % > % > a) You can not take widely distributed wiki's in
> different contexts % > and run them all together into the same
> wiki and have something % > meaningful result. % > % > b) You must
> have people come to agreement on the explicit meaning % > of
> specific WikiWords in order for them to come to agreement % >
> about the larger issue. % > % > c) And where WikiWords have two
> seperate definitions that have not % > been % > refactored into an
> appropriate form, you still have a discussion % > that has not
> reached maturity. % > % > % > % > % > % > % > % > % > % > ----- % >
> John Sechrest . Helping people use % > CTO PEAK -
> . computers and the Internet % > Public
> Electronic . more effectively % > Access to
> Knowledge,Inc . % > 1600 SW Western, Suite
> 180 . Internet: % > sechrest@peak.org Corvallis
> Oregon 97333 . % > (541) 754-7325 % >
> . http://www.peak.org/~sechrest % > %
> > -- % > This message is archived at: % > % >
> http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=2003
> 0 % > 5132142.h4DLgZN19150@jas.peak.org % > % > % % % -- % This
> message is archived at: % %
> http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=3EC2
> 6D1B.10004.3271B6@localhost
>
> -----
> John Sechrest . Helping people use
> CTO PEAK - . computers and the Internet
> Public Electronic . more effectively
> Access to Knowledge,Inc .
> 1600 SW Western, Suite 180 . Internet:
> sechrest@peak.org Corvallis Oregon 97333 .
> (541) 754-7325
> . http://www.peak.org/~sechrest
>
> --
> This message is archived at:
>
> http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=20030
> 5141552.h4EFq1h16794@jas.peak.org
>
> (04)
--
This message is archived at: (05)
http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=3EC3DC13.691.17A32E@localhost (06)
|