By the way, I'm interested in applying the
SmashedTogetherWords/InterWikiMap model outside of wikis - as a weird
front-end ApplicationIntegration approach. (01)
http://webseitz.fluxent.com/wiki/AppWiki (02)
Bill Seitz wrote: (03)
> My theory is that with such a FreeLink model (which you'll see on the
> SocialText wiki, for example), there will be much less re-use of
> WikiWords - e.g. each page will have fewer BackLinks than in a wiki
> using SmashedTogetherWords. Reduced intertwingularity. Because I think
> the FreeLink approach makes the focus "I want to generate a page off
> of this page..." without adding the "... which other people will be
> able to link to without thinking about it much".
>
> SmashedTogetherWords place more of a mental barrier on the
> creation/naming of new pages, but by doing so increase the odds of
> re-use. (I believe.)
>
> Pretty hard to do a controlled experiment. Once there are lots of
> wikis out there, perhaps some statistical approach might add weight.
>
> Peter P. Jones wrote:
>
>> On 14 May 2003 at 8:52, John Sechrest wrote:
>>
>> 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.)
>>
>> I'm also on a mission from the Plain English Commission, as you might
>> have guessed. ;)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> (04)
--
This message is archived at: (05)
http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=3EC3E1A2.1060904@fluxent.com (06)
|