Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What's with Wikis?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What's with Wikis?

    ** This thread discusses the article: What's with Wikis? **
    This is a discussion about What's with Wikis?.

    Click here for the article.


  • #2
    What's with Wikis?

    ** This thread discusses the article: What's with Wikis? **
    Very interesting article? However the whole idea of a wiki is 'open'. Which means that the reader has to be able to change the errors he seas. It is the whole idea also of open-source development projects. What is wrong with that? A few weeks ago a Belgian radiostation tested the very wikipedia. The posted an article with a lot of errors in: typo's but also factual incorrect matters. After a few minutes already the articles were being changed and after a few hours the were all error free. That's what wiki's are about.

    Comment


    • #3
      What's with Wikis?

      ** This thread discusses the article: What's with Wikis? **
      Yes, and it's not really correct to say the writing is by committee. There is no committee, and there are no meetings. So the problem that committees typically have (too much compromise, too long to make decisions, too many opportunities for political manipulation) is essentially moot. Also, the wiki's I've seen have superb undo functions. Therefore if you are dealing with a case of vandalism, manipulation, or other clearly improper changes, you can back those changes out easily. The basic idea wiki's are built upon is that more people are willing to be truthful, accurate and responsible than not. My big problem is with the name. Doesn't the name "wiki" sound a little silly?

      Comment


      • #4
        What's with Wikis?

        ** This thread discusses the article: What's with Wikis? **
        Ralph said:
        Yes, and it's not really correct to say the writing is by committee. There is no committee, and there are no meetings.
        Absolutely right. I should have been less ambiguous. I was commenting on the Wikipedia definition of wikis as facilitating "collaborative writing". I was trying to say that IF collaborative writing meant creative writing by committee I would not be comfortable with that. I was not trying to say that's what Wikipedia does. (Although, for all I know, other wikis that I don't know about may do that. A committee doesn't have to meet in person. It can still be a committee if it meets online asynchronously through the vehicle of a wiki.) I then went on to say that I do approve of collaborative writing for the purpose of consolidating factual information from a number of sources, which is basically what Wikipedia does. Ralph also said,
        The basic idea wiki's are built upon is that more people are willing to be truthful, accurate and responsible than not.
        Maybe I'm just a cynic, but I'd like to forward all of the spam I get to whoever came up with that idea. They might change their mind about the basic truthfulness, accurateness and responsibleness of most people. Ralph also said,
        My big problem is with the name. Doesn't the name "wiki" sound a little silly?
        I absolutely agree. I was sure there had to be a really good joke about the name "wiki" (preferably one that MC Press would let me print), but I just couldn't think of one. If anyone else can think of one, please post it here.

        Comment


        • #5
          What's with Wikis?

          ** This thread discusses the article: What's with Wikis? **
          What may not be totally clear from Joel's article is that Wikipedia is just one implementation of the underlying wiki software that is available for free, running on Linux boxes. This means you can install the wiki software and run it for your own commercial purposes. This is exactly what we've done in our busines (a software development company). We run a wiki for discussing R + D projects, proposing new features lists for products, keeping track of technical discussions and findings, publishing internal documents that comprise tech tips (we have pages on Javascript routines, for example), notes on staff meetings, etc. The collaborative nature of the wiki software makes it ideal for this kind of use. The wiki tracks changes to pages, allows rollback of changes, logs who made what changes, and allows complete formatting of text within the confines of its editing rules (it even supports entering complex mathematical equations). We run our wiki on an old PC that is probably worth about $100 Canadian these days - so basically it's a free solution. Because the wiki lets you impose your own organization over documentation (defining categories, internal links to other wiki pages or external pages, it's much better than spattering disorganized documents all over network drives and never being able to find anything. So I encourage you to look at Wiki technology. We also use our own portal product, Nexus, to index and manage documents external to the wiki, so we have the best of both worlds. Both these solutions have helped us communicate much more effectively in our office, improving our overall productivity.

          Comment


          • #6
            What's with Wikis?

            ** This thread discusses the article: What's with Wikis? **
            Hi Joel, Brian wrote that. If this were a Wiki I'd be able to correct it, but I also could change anything else written, so there in a nutshell is both the good and the bad of Wiki. Wiki is derived from the Hawaiian wiki wiki, meaning quick or fast. I guess Wikipedia could have been named Funk & Wagnall's, but Microsoft bought that and renamed it Encarta. I guess it could have been named Quickenpedia, but that's sort of taken too. Or we could take IBM's route, and name it WebSphere Collaborative Middleware Middlepedia Server, but that's probably locked up with one of their gazillion patents. Such a good name too. What a shame. So, hmmm, I'll go Hawaiian and stick with Wiki. That is quick and fast. rd

            Comment

            Working...
            X