Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-wiki (174 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-wiki] AI2, AI 5 & AI6 Status report
  • From: Rupert Horstkötter <rhorstkoetter@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:44:27 +0100
  • Message-id: <26d1a5470912160244je3283fet92b15fc3f2e3387e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Remy,

2009/12/15 Rémy Marquis <remy.marquis@xxxxxxxxx>:

Some feedback/suggestions:

1. Do we need "general help" in the knowledge bar? I.e. what should be
linked there in particular? Wouldn't it be better to leave this apart
and put "related articles" there (currently on the very bottom)?
That'd be even more useful unless someone explains the actual need of
"general help".

I agree. Originally, I put direct links to general help here because I
didn't know what to put to "fil the gap" :)

I see.

Let's move the "See also" section here instead (shall we rename it
"Related articles" ?)

Yes, sounds more reasonable than "See also"

2. Not sure how difficult that'd be but I'd appreciate to have a
second article-template with a vertical right-aligned table of
contents instead of the horizontal one we currently have. I assume
this is a matter of minutes for wiki seniors :-) Is it? Not sure, but
I THINK this may look even better. May you come up with a second one
to compare please?

Well, I got mixed feeling about the results I obtained.

Looking at the pages that actually use TOCright (
http://en.opensuse.org/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:TOCright ) and
playing with the page I newly created (
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Article_Template2 ), we can observe
lot of inconsistency depending on the content of the page.
Sometime the TOC integrate well into the page, sometimes it pulls down
all the text leaving a large blank space (specially when we use a wide
Template such as Info or Warning).. I think it's also not easy to
correct it everywhere, because even though we can modify all
templates, the effects of the TOC depend on the length of the TOC
(length of article) and the length of the headings and section title.

For the moment, I would go using the horizontal TOC to give a more
consistent, professional aspect to the wiki.

Aligned. If it's too difficult to achieve I second this. I can't
estimate it anyway (honest person I am) and thus I go along with your
decision. Thanks for trying it though!


AI#5 : Wiki Guidelines
---------------------------
I've cleaned, merged the bunch of articles that were talking about
Guidelines.
The new "Wiki Guidelines" can be accessed here :
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Wiki_Guidelines

That's a good start. That said, we absolutely cannot put this (...)
online and publicly available. This has to be formulated way more
diplomatic :-)

"Put online in August 2005, the openSUSE wiki has proved to be an
invaluable documentation resource for users as well as contributors
and developers. However, the number of page exponentially increased
over the years and this uncontrolled growth came at the expense of the
overall quality of the openSUSE wiki, with articles only partially
written or duplicating others."

Hopefully, you don't know what was my initial thought when I wrote
this sentence ;)

Actually I can't wait to finally know it ;-)

Any help to give more neutrality to this paragraph is welcomed.

I wrote something accordingly in my initial concept proposal
--
Currently we have no QA and publishing processes for wiki articles.
This makes it very hard to assure a consistent quality across all
articles. In the past several approaches were made to clean up and
scan the wiki in order to sort and merge articles, to assure a
consistent quality, to merge duplicates, introduce meaningful
categories etc. However, we are still not where we want to be.
--
A slight variation of that (in past tense) would work out imho. It's
all about the tone and language of the text .. the message actually is
the very same :-)


Also, please think about where we can explain the QA process in detail
most appropriately, i.e. the FlaggedRevs/Wiki-Forum
reviewing/approving process. I'll provide the actual explanation once
AI #3 finally is ironed out.

I guess we can use http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Wiki_Guidelines for
the QA process explanation, or even a new separate page, depending on
the length and complexity of the explanation.

+1, due to the complexity of the QA topic I'd suggest a new seperate
page cited at http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Wiki_Guidelines, i.e. a
very rough explanation there and a deeper one on a seperate page.

Best,
R

Regards,

R.




--
Rupert Horstkötter, open-slx gmbh
openSUSE Board Member
openSUSE Community Assistant
http://en.opensuse.org/User:Rhorstkoetter
Email: rhorstkoetter@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Jabber: ruperthorstkoetter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >