Steven Walling | 3 Apr 23:31 2013

Re: Proposal: Wikitech contributors

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Ryan Lane <rlane32 <at>> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Steven Walling <steven.walling <at>
> >wrote:
> > Quim, I think even this first iteration is problematic on a bunch of
> > fronts. 3 months as a first iteration to build several major features as
> > the basic proof of concept should be a sign that you're biting off too
> much
> > in terms of scope.
> >
> >
> I think this is somewhat exaggerated. Almost all of the things proposed can
> likely be done by defining a set of semantic properties, modifying existing
> templates, then adding queries into templates that can be added back into
> the same templates we're already using on other pages. Defining forms is
> also relatively simple for all of this. I doubt much or any of this will
> requirement any development work.
> If we hire someone that already has a lot of SMW experience, this is likely
> a pretty easy target.
> > I also think it's deeply problematic that you don't seem to have shaped
> the
> > proposal based on the expressed needs of people who have tried to use the
> > current system and failed, and that you're seemingly ignoring the use
> case
> > of all the many different kinds of contributors by focusing a
> comprehensive
> > restructure solely for new contributors. When we make something like
> Echo,
> > we're doing it first and foremost to attract new people, but we can't get
> > away with ignoring the needs of existing users.
> >
> >
> We have a current system?
> > In general, I don't think you've fully considered how the current set up
> > might serve our needs with less heavy-handed changes than migrating to
> > Semantic MediaWiki, and I'm wary of supporting a restructuring of
> > documentation systems I depend of every day based on a grand plan of any
> > kind.
> >
> >
> Almost all of the changes Quim is suggesting will likely be completely
> transparent to you and your normal processes. Semantic annotations are
> almost always added to templates and users have no clue that magic is
> happening behind them.
> - Ryan
Let me put it a simpler way: I don't support moving to Semantic MediaWiki,
which to me as user seems like a somewhat arcane and bloated piece of
software that will require me and lots of people to relearn how we write
documentation and project tracking, unless you can show why the changes you
want to make are A) necessary B) require SMW to accomplish them.
Demonstrating that the high level structure proposed will work before
making the more drastic change seems like a good way to convince everyone
that what's being proposed is the right path toward a better wiki for all.

Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at>