Hi there,

I am a little bit confused. Starting at

        http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html

the first entry in the list directs me to the WIKI

        http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FaqRoadmap

In that WIKI, the topic "How to become more involved" has two links for contributing to a WIKI:

        http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?Wiki4D
and
        http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi

Both seem similar but not identical. Which one is the official WIKI? What is the point of the other one? Could the unofficial WIKI perhaps be closed or at least be clearly marked to avoid future confusion?

Ciao,
Nobbi

Norbert Nemec wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> I am a little bit confused. Starting at
> 
>         http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html
> 
> the first entry in the list directs me to the WIKI
> 
>         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FaqRoadmap
> 
> In that WIKI, the topic "How to become more involved" has two links for
> contributing to a WIKI:
> 
>         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?Wiki4D
> and
>         http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
> 
> Both seem similar but not identical. Which one is the official WIKI? What is

These URLs all go to the same place:
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage

The only difference that I know of is that the "Preferences" for prowiki and wikiservice is separate (probably because of how the cookie is set). Other than that (and the different URLs), they are the same. The content is the same. Recent changes is the same:

http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?RecentChanges
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?RecentChanges

Have you seen some differences that I haven't noted above?

> the point of the other one? Could the unofficial WIKI perhaps be closed or
> at least be clearly marked to avoid future confusion?

There are two due to historical reasons:
http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/12175

I don't that one can or should be "marked" as official because I think both URLs point to the same place.

I hope this helps.

> 
> Ciao,
> Nobbi


-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

J C Calvarese wrote:

> These URLs all go to the same place: http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage

Thanks for that info. I realize that I actually was looking at different parts of the same wiki all the time.

Looking at my own confusion, I would suggest to clean up the situation in several ways:

* Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to see two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or alternative.

* The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should simply be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be called FAQ or given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.

* The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of a book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When I'm lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home" or "index".

* On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ page, there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the top of the wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ (pointing to the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the link list. (If the wiki is officially supported by the core D project, then it should not appear in the link list among all the third-party pages at all.

Norbert Nemec wrote:
> J C Calvarese wrote:
> 
> 
>>These URLs all go to the same place:
>>http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
>>http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage
>>http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
>>http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FrontPage
> 
> 
> Thanks for that info. I realize that I actually was looking at different
> parts of the same wiki all the time.
> 
> Looking at my own confusion, I would suggest to clean up the situation in
> several ways:

I agree it can be confusing.

> 
> * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to see
> two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link
> leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it
> actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two
> places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or
> alternative.

So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.

> 
> * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term
> usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any
> other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should simply
> be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be called FAQ or
> given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.

I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL?
http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ

Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)

> 
> * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of a
> book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When I'm
> lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home" or
> "index".

Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any case, I don't know how change it.)

> * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ page,
> there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the top of the
> wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ (pointing to
> the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the link list. (If the
> wiki is officially supported by the core D project, then it should not
> appear in the link list among all the third-party pages at all.

I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such as the one you describe) would be beneficial.

-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

J C Calvarese wrote:

>> * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to see two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or alternative.
> 
> So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.

I don't really care which one. What is the internal connection between the two? Is the one mirroring the other? Maybe prowiki might be the better choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a private or a German language site.

>> * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should simply be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be called FAQ or given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.
> 
> I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL? http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ
> 
> Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)

Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick! "Roadmap" is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used. People reading it will expect something about the future plans for D. For example:

http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html http://www.go-mono.com/mono-roadmap.html

Or, even more famous: The processor roadmap of AMD and Intel. Even Microsoft (if anybody should actually care about their opinion) uses the term "roadmap" in this meaning.

I admit, that googling for the term "roadmap" also brings some hits for use similar to that in the D wiki, but still I would say, it is just a common mistake.

>> * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of a book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When I'm lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home" or "index".
> 
> Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any
> case, I don't know how change it.)

OK, if it is hard to change, never mind. Anyway: I guess the most confusing point in that respect is, that the term Frontpage appears in the "menu"-line together with all these wiki-internal links. A separate "navigation"-pane on every page, showing some hierarchy, would be clearer. But then, there does not seems to be any strict hierarchy at all among the pages?

>> * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ page, there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the top of the wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ (pointing to the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the link list. (If the wiki is officially supported by the core D project, then it should not appear in the link list among all the third-party pages at all.
> 
> I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such as the one you describe) would be beneficial.

OK. Over to Walter, then...

"Norbert Nemec" <Norbert.Nemec@gmx.de> wrote in message news:cb3b46$2869$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> J C Calvarese wrote:
>
> >> * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to see two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a
link
> >> leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or alternative.
> >
> > So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.
>
> I don't really care which one. What is the internal connection between the two? Is the one mirroring the other? Maybe prowiki might be the better choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a private or a German language site.
>
> >> * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this
term
> >> usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in
any
> >> other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should simply be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be called FAQ or given some really descriptive name, it that is to
general.
> >
> > I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL? http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ
> >
> > Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)
>
> Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick! "Roadmap" is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used. People reading it will expect something about the future plans for D. For example:
>
> http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html http://www.go-mono.com/mono-roadmap.html
>
> Or, even more famous: The processor roadmap of AMD and Intel. Even
Microsoft
> (if anybody should actually care about their opinion) uses the term
> "roadmap" in this meaning.
>
> I admit, that googling for the term "roadmap" also brings some hits for
use
> similar to that in the D wiki, but still I would say, it is just a common mistake.
>
> >> * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page"
of
> >> a book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When I'm lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home" or "index".
> >
> > Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any
> > case, I don't know how change it.)
>
> OK, if it is hard to change, never mind. Anyway: I guess the most
confusing
> point in that respect is, that the term Frontpage appears in the "menu"-line together with all these wiki-internal links. A separate "navigation"-pane on every page, showing some hierarchy, would be clearer. But then, there does not seems to be any strict hierarchy at all among the pages?
>
> >> * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ page, there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the
top
> >> of the wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ (pointing to the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the link list. (If the wiki is officially supported by the core D project, then it should not appear in the link list among all the third-party pages at all.
> >
> > I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such as the one you describe) would be beneficial.
>
> OK. Over to Walter, then...
>
Shouldnt it be "over to JC " ?

Phill wrote:

>> >> * On the left-hand navigation bar of the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ page, there should be a separate point "wiki" linking directly to the
> top
>> >> of the wiki. Currently, the only links I could find are in the FAQ (pointing to the FAQ portion of the wiki) and somewhere hidden in the link list. (If the wiki is officially supported by the core D project, then it should not appear in the link list among all the third-party pages at all.
>> >
>> > I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such as the one you describe) would be beneficial.
>>
>> OK. Over to Walter, then...
>>
> Shouldnt it be "over to JC " ?

If I'm correct, the http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ pages are maintained by Walter. The wiki is maintained by JC. My comment was about adding a link from the first to the latter, so Walter would be the one to decide about it.

Norbert Nemec wrote:
> I am a little bit confused. Starting at
> 
>         http://www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html
> 
> the first entry in the list directs me to the WIKI
> 
>         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FaqRoadmap
> 
> In that WIKI, the topic "How to become more involved" has two links for contributing to a WIKI:
> 
>         http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?Wiki4D
> and
>         http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
> 
> Both seem similar but not identical. Which one is the official WIKI? What is the point of the other one? Could the unofficial WIKI perhaps be closed or at least be clearly marked to avoid future confusion?

I'm sorry about the confusion. Currently a number of domains all point to the same server-directory and can be used to the same effect.

Being a non-profit-project, the org-Domains seem most appropriate
to access Wiki4D:
   http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi

If contributors prefer, we can care for a special domain for this wiki.

-- 
Helmut Leitner    leitner@hls.via.at
Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com

Norbert Nemec wrote:
> >> * Even if both wikis are identical, it is confusing to the newcomer to see two of them without an explanation. Especially, if you follow a link leading somewhere inside the wiki, it is rather hard to see that it actually is the same one you were at before. Therefore, one of the two places should be declared official, the other either deprecated or alternative.
> >
> > So which one do you vote for as the "official" URL? The prowiki.org one is shorter. I guess that'd be my choice.

Me too.

> I don't really care which one. What is the internal connection between the two? Is the one mirroring the other?

No, they just point to the same place.

> Maybe prowiki might be the better
> choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more
> international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a
> private or a German language site.

Austrian and german language. Private would be a wrong guess.

> >> * The term "roadmap" is absolutely inappropriately used. In IT, this term usually refers to the future plans of development. Using the term in any other connotation is strongly misleading. A "history roadmap" should simply be called "history". The "FaqRoadmap" should either simply be called FAQ or given some really descriptive name, it that is to general.
> >
> > I think this is perilously close to a nitpick. Have your tried this URL? http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FAQ
> >
> > Don't be alarmed if the resulting page looks familiar. ;)
> 
> Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick! "Roadmap" is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used. People reading it will expect something about the future plans for D. For example:

I agree, I chose the name. It's my fault.

The preferred ways are:
  (1) change the name yourself (it's a wiki after all)
  (2) post your comments to the wiki (so that the wikizens there will know)

> I admit, that googling for the term "roadmap" also brings some hits for use similar to that in the D wiki, but still I would say, it is just a common mistake.

As I said, you are right. No need to get religious about this.

> >> * The term "Front Page" also is somewhat misleading. The "front page" of a book is the page that looks pretty but gives little information. When I'm lost on some web-site, the first terms I look for are "top", "home" or "index".
> >
> > Often I look in the top right-hand corner. Oh, there it is. :) (In any
> > case, I don't know how change it.)
> 
> OK, if it is hard to change, never mind.

It is not hard to change, I can be configured in a minute.
There is
  - a label at the link bar ("FrontPage", maybe "Home")
  - a page linked to the label (usually "FrontPage")

> Anyway: I guess the most confusing
> point in that respect is, that the term Frontpage appears in the
> "menu"-line together with all these wiki-internal links. A separate
> "navigation"-pane on every page, showing some hierarchy, would be clearer.
> But then, there does not seems to be any strict hierarchy at all among the
> pages?

No, with a few exceptions, they exist in a flat space.
Hierarchies are hard to maintain in a multiple point of view system.
We use folders and roadmaps (the real ones) to create order in wikis.

> > I don't think it's the "official" wiki, but I think it's the best and the _de facto_ standard wiki. I agree that a more prominent link (such as the one you describe) would be beneficial.
> 
> OK. Over to Walter, then...

The wiki was created to support the D community.
If I can help, I'll do what I can. A consensus would be fine.

-- 
Helmut Leitner    leitner@hls.via.at
Graz, Austria   www.hls-software.com

Helmut Leitner wrote:

>> Maybe prowiki might be the better
>> choice not only because of the length, but also because .org is more
>> international than .at - on an .at page I would rather expect either a
>> private or a German language site.
> 
> Austrian and german language.

True, not to ignore all these beautiful special expressions you Austrians use...

> Private would be a wrong guess.

Of course, in this case. Just my general experience with national domain-names in similar contexts. Projects setting up official pages with international audience would usually pick .com or .org names. Inofficial sites are more likely to use the national domain-name of some hosting provider.

>> Sorry, but choosing appropriate terms is everything but nitpick! "Roadmap" is strongly misleading in the two places where it is used. People reading it will expect something about the future plans for D. For example:
> 
> I agree, I chose the name. It's my fault.
> 
> The preferred ways are:
>   (1) change the name yourself (it's a wiki after all)
>   (2) post your comments to the wiki (so that the wikizens there will
>   know)

I'm not very comfortable with writing to the wiki yet. Especially, I don't think it is a good idea to choose editing the title of some major page as my first action as a newcomer... :-)

> No, with a few exceptions, they exist in a flat space.
> Hierarchies are hard to maintain in a multiple point of view system.
> We use folders and roadmaps (the real ones) to create order in wikis.

Guess it will take me some time to adjust to that philosophy. I've just a little experience with two other WIKI systems and each one seems to have a philosophy on its own. But then - this one seems simple enough to learn quickly.