TarPits? GoodNess! (01)
I've been thinking about this too. I started out NexistWiki 1.0 as
capable of handling CamelCase words and then dropped it as I migrated
towards the later versions, now up to 1.9. My reason, which may not
apply to the needs of other wiki users, was that it turned out to be
more useful to facilitate the thoughtful (no offense intended in the
implied comparison) creation of topics and associations (new pages and
links); that is, the requirement that if you need a new place to fume
and shout, you should go to the page where those places are organized
and create it from there, and while you're at it, go to the associations
page and create the links you need if they don't already exist. (02)
I suppose I was weighting the necessity to craft a sound topic map
higher than providing the ability to toss in random thoughts in the form
of CamelCase link generators. In such decisions, your mileage may vary.
Surely, wikis as Ward Cunningham created them are more than popular
enough that, even in the coming polar meltdowns, they will still be
around, TarPits notwithstanding. (03)
Jack
Peter P. Jones wrote: (04)
>On 2 Mar 2004 at 22:36, Murray Altheim wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>
>>Yes, I just read this other thread and now see the point. I think it's
>>necessary to discuss epistemology (whether we use the
>>UglyPhilosophicalWord or not), as part of what this group is *about*
>>is sharing concepts. And I see that not using SmashedTogetherWords and
>>taking the approach I suggested (i.e., of just having the system tag
>>specific, known phrases) would not work in the same way because using
>>a SmashedTogetherWord means that one has agreed (at least in theory)
>>that one is talking about the same concept. Thus, it's important to
>>note that
>>
>> SmashedTogetherWords != Smashed Together Words
>>
>>because the latter does not signify an agreement on meaning.
>>
>>
>
>I sympathise, because I trawled this point for ages on this very same
>list some time ago - seemingly without significant impact. I'm
>looking at the bowels of JSPWiki (when time permits) at present and
>I've been using it a bit to see if it is a useful tool for PIM as
>distinct for collaborative IM over the Web.
>
>Frankly, I'm finding it very frustrating for PIM because the
>interface isn't flexible enough. I need two windows:
>1) One has the index of Wikiwords in one frame and clicking on a term
>puts it in the other frame.
>2) The other would contain the current page I'm editing.
>
>The reason? Smashed together words aren't memorable and are rarely
>meaningful enough to capture anything adequate to memorability.
>
>IF I *didn't* have to work with smashed together words I could do
>away with that need and just work on one page at a time knowing stuff
>would be picked up as Murray suggested. (+1 for Murray's suggestion -
>a road I'm heading down anyway in my own slow way).
>
><polemic>
>It strikes me that,
>a) The basic Wiki design was adequate when browsers couldn't script
>stuff properly;
>b) That design is now obsolete.
>
>Smashed together words are destined for the tar pit of extinction,
>imho. The sooner we speed that process up the better.
></polemic>
>
>
> (05)
--
This message is archived at: (06)
http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=yak&i=4045DE6D.2040208@thinkalong.com (07)
|