TonyArmani

MeatballWiki | RecentChanges | Random Page | Indices | Categories

Here you can read my ideas about wikis, especially Oddmuse. http://www.oddmuse.org/cgi-bin/wiki/TonyArmani

Is it possible to upload gif/jpg/png files here (for explaining some new wiki feature proposals)?

: You can link to images just by writing their URL; they will be put inline if MB recognises the suffix as an image suffix. However, you must first host them elsewhere. -- ChrisPurcell

Thanks Chris for your comment. I added the picture in the Oddmuse wiki which you can see here: http://www.oddmuse.org/cgi-bin/wiki/Link_Type_Positioning_In_A_Wiki_Page

Discussion of this topic can continue anywhere you want. (providing the links here would be nice)

: Take a quick look at MetadataSyntax and my PeriPeri engine, it might interest you. -- ChrisPurcell

I looked at MetadataSyntax and your PeriPeri engine. How do you see the relationships between the thoughts/implementations there and what I described in the picture above? Could I implement this description in the picture with your "header linking" method? On PeriPeri:ContextualLinking this part can be read:

: "On Wiki:WikiWikiWeb, a system evolved called Wiki:WikiCategories, whereby every page could be categorized simply by putting a link to the relevant category anywhere on the page. On PeriPeri, this has evolved into the MetadataSyntax system, where "special" links like categories are placed in headers on the page."

As far as I can recognize what I describe in the picture above is a third form of bringing structure into the "wiki page chaos". I'm an Oddmuse user and hope it's possible to implement this feature as a new Oddmuse module. The concept of the picture is further explained in a short form here: http://www.oddmuse.org/cgi-bin/wiki/Hierarchic_Linking_Module_Proposal --TonyArmani

: PeriPeri has typed links, like your parent/child links except more flexible. It automatically creates backlinks (or "implications") of the correct type. It also puts the typed links in special positions on the page, which could easily be where you suggested. -- ChrisPurcell

I believe you that typed links of PeriPeri are more flexible than what I would like to build with parent/child links. I would like to have the flexibility to use wikis as always, meaning the link types should be defined within the content text rather than on the top as a header using a specific syntax. Does PeriPeri support adding of typed links in the content text anywhere (not as a header) or do you think PeriPeri could be modified in such a way that it still works (e.g. using my proposed syntax with ,c and ,p)? Also I don't want to build complex ontologies in the wiki which should be understood by the computer itself. I mean I don't need 100 link types. Only 2 additional ones (parent,child) to get the flexibility to direct my links in the text to a "relative" upper hierarchy and "relative" lower hierarchy from the page content position. This would be flexible enough (for me) to do anything for better structuring wiki contents. Mainly this new possibility would improve many points what I listed in http://www.oddmuse.org/cgi-bin/wiki/TonyArmani in the section "What I don't like in wikis" (near bottom of the page). So it seems that positioning of typed links is already supported by PeriPeri. Additional AnywhereUsage? and VerySimpleMarkup? support would be great. --TonyArmani

: PeriPeri could easily be altered to use a different metadata markup pattern. (Incidentally, it only understands DublinCore right now, not 100 link types :) -- ChrisPurcell

I'll wait until I see a page which uses AnywhereUsage? of "typed links" with a VerySimpleMarkup? or VeryFastMarkup? which seems not to be available yet (also not in PeriPeri). I also don't know how many features of Oddmuse are missing in PeriPeri so this comparison is hard to beat I suppose. On the other hand I would give up some features in favour of a structured wiki if the missing features are not too important to me. --TonyArmani

: Well, if you want it to happen with PeriPeri, you'll need to alter the markup pattern yourself. I'm not a fan of "cute" patterns like appending ",c". If you're going to pull the links out of the text before you display them, what's the point of allowing them to be placed anywhere in the text? It just makes it harder to maintain them. -- ChrisPurcell

The point of allowing the different links (parent,child,jump) anywhere in the text is the same as in any normal wiki, you write something and link to other things (which were written before or might be added in future). Why do you use links in a wiki page all over the page and not only in the header is the same question (for me)? e.g. when adding CategoryLinks? below your page, I wouldn't add them as a normal (jump) link but a parent link which could itself again have other parent links, jump links... so you can go always up in the hierarchy or down, with each link. Or jump to any hierarchy which would be equal to multiple parent-child combinations. We can always step up or down 1 hierarchy level (using parent or child) or step any hierarchy difference at once (using jump). Your content can have hierarchy. Why should I limit the positions of those "hierarchy changing links" to the header if Perl would allow them to be anywhere. (I only hope that there are algorithms which are not too much calculation expensive to collect those links from the content text). --TonyArmani

: You can put links anywhere in text because it helps one build up a PatternLanguage. However, hierarchy links like categories are always taken out of the flow of text and put somewhere standardised (such as below the page), because it is not helpful to build a sentence around them. Indeed, you have already said that you will take the hierarchy links out of the flow of the text - so why put them in there in the first place? -- ChrisPurcell

Maybe it's time to stop thinking that "hierarchy changing links" have to stay out of the flow of the text? Is there any mathematical prove that they can't help at all in the flow of the text? Let me give an example: Let's assume that I'm editing the page "Wiki". Here in each link (in any sentence) e.g. to a WikiImplementation? like Oddmuse or PeriPeri I wouldn't use a normal link, but a child link to emphasize additionally that those two new links (to Oddmuse and to PeriPeri) belong "somehow" (in my thinking) to a lower hierarchy than "Wiki". At the moment I can't emphasize this with each sentence, with each link (because we have only 1 link type which is a "jump link" and the parent,child links are missing). Does this make sense also for you? For me it would be the possibility to add additional hierarchic information to each new link, at its place, not on a specific position. Yes, I would use them also (for categories, for tagging, and more), but not only. Or let me give one more example: Let's now assume I'm editing the page "PeriPeri". When using a link to your name "ChrisPurcell" on that page I wouldn't simply link to your name, but use a parent link to your name. That would again emphasize that you are in a higher hierarchy than PeriPeri. The possibilities are endless in my opinion. You only need to find out if the new link has any relative position to the actual page position/content. Only when you can't see any "logical" relationship you would use normal (jump) linking. The benefit of all those additionally added "hierarchical" information would be they could be used for better structuring your content and better navigational support, e.g. by placing them on positions as I proposed above in the picture. --TonyArmani

: I don't think this is a good idea: you risk flooding the user with links and thus drowning out the benefits. Nevertheless, one can only decide whether it's really a good or bad idea by doing it. Can you program? Perhaps a Wiki:SpikeSolution is in order. -- ChrisPurcell

The "link flooding" would start if the page texts would be very general or long. This would enforce you writing pages with less text and using more specific/detailed linking. If the number of links would be e.g. higher than 10 you could select only the most 5 visited pages and 5 least visited pages (and maybe 5 more random visited pages) and show only those as a navigational support. I can program but not as good as any WikiImplementation? creator like you or AlexSchröder or an Oddmuse module developer like FletcherPenny?. If nobody is faster than me I will try to write an Oddmuse module in this century. Now I'm in the phase of introducing this idea in the wiki community and wait what will happen. Maybe I'm not the only excited, lonely guy about this feature? :) In one or two years the situation might have changed and all wikis might support this feature except PeriPeri. ;) Thanks anyway for all your comments. Now other potential interested wiki users/developers have more unstructured text to read. --TonyArmani

CategoryHomePage HierarchicLinking StructuringWikiPageChaos?