audiocommander Posted April 20, 2006 Report Share Posted April 20, 2006 Hi,I wonder if we could get a better structure of the WIKI Homepage?I think the main page is very unsorted and the time-based concept (preparation, parts, construction) isn't sufficient for the bunch of entries growing steadily.The frame of ucapps is very well sorted, so why not take this sorting as basis? We are all used to that structure!Eg the first entry of the wiki could link to the correspondig ucApps documents (marked as "official" but then there could be more entries, thematically related.So, MIOS and MBHP and the different MBHP-based projects would be differentiated and not mixed up, which is (so I belive) very confusing for beginners.Also, one can easily navigate due to the similarity of information-structures.What do you think? ::) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digineural Posted April 20, 2006 Report Share Posted April 20, 2006 I think a little cleaning up would be nice too, in terms of updated content, but the wiki doesn't quite support the same type of frames that ucApps is using. Its actually more manageable and cross-browser compliant the way the wiki is now. Thats not to say that the wiki is better, just for what the wiki is supposed to do. It could have the same sidebar layout as ucApps, but then there would be no content to the most of the page, just a sliver of content on the left. BTW i did update the english MBLC page. I got sick of babelfishing the german version. You can also make updates to the wiki if you feel comfortable enough with it.-Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiocommander Posted April 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 Yeah, I see ;)Just to avoid misunderstandings: I meant the index page of the wiki and the sorting of the linked entries. I haven't really thought of the design or framing the wiki ;DBut this would mean a total resorting of the current entries, so I want to discuss it first. Maybe my POV is not the best way to go. :-\I believe, the better the structure, the more people use it, the more it is used, the more content it gets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted April 21, 2006 Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 I believe, the better the structure, the more people use it, the more it is used, the more content it gets.Totally agree. That might be why so many newbies don't bother reading things.. It's also probably why relative veterans can often miss info too...It's kind of a rite of passage around here though. Everyone knows that there is plenty of doco, but it's spread out like crazy. We're all forced to go to great lengths to develop a clear understanding of midiboxing, before we can start out... Some like it, some don't, some, like me, think it has its upsides and downsides... I'll just do whatever TK or TwinX says, cause it's their project/server in the end :)"Just following orders, Sir" ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digineural Posted April 21, 2006 Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 Absolutely, structure is important. Now that I see your point, I think you're on to something good. :D Basically a user updatable version of ucApps.That might be why so many newbies don't bother reading things.. It's also probably why relative veterans can often miss info too...We ... I mean um ... the gurus ;) could make it a rule of thumb to post answers to issues from the forum on the wiki so that information is more centralized. -- Then again I'm just newbie ;D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted April 21, 2006 Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 We ... I mean um ... the gurus ;) could make it a rule of thumbThen again I'm just newbie ;DI like "we". No need to segregate based on post count :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moebius Posted April 21, 2006 Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 It's such a brilliant IDEA to TALK about restructuring Wiki at the forum.. ::)When You actually login and do the changes at Wiki, the possible "Whoops" factor is zero IE. it can be reverted back to the original state.M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digineural Posted April 21, 2006 Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 You smell that ? .... smells like irony ;D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted April 21, 2006 Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 Sarcasm maybe. Moebius is the sarcasm king :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moebius Posted April 21, 2006 Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 What - I was dead serious! ;)I gave an OK for edits - do it people! If it's not working it can be cancelled or changed by anybody else. The current stucture is imported from the old Wiki and hey - there's no FINAL version here.As I had some troubles with Wiki syntax 'n' all - I was given an advise by Smash to keep away from :namespace 's -I'm not sure if those are enabled anyway. This means that You'll have to stay away from dublicate name entrys for the pages.Looks like someone has a vision how to make Wiki more accessible - spare a moment or two and do it!! (I think we are mostly caring about 'so called' newbies and try to make information easily available)Moebius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiocommander Posted April 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2006 OK ;DI did it.don't say I didn't warn you! :omwuahahahaha (damn, there's no insane-laughter-smiley) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digineural Posted April 22, 2006 Report Share Posted April 22, 2006 Its ... its ... beautiful :'( So clean and organized. You'd make your mother proud. No, seriously, Great work, I think this is a great idea and well put. Somebody give this man some karma ... stat. This is a great start at making things more consistant. I'll try to collect more info from the forum over the next few weeks and compile it into the wiki as well.Again, nice work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted April 22, 2006 Report Share Posted April 22, 2006 Haahahahaha :DNice work AC!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moebius Posted May 1, 2006 Report Share Posted May 1, 2006 It was labour day wasn't it... ;) did some restructuring.Few pointers:I like nested structures. This helps keeping wikihome tidyToo much esternal links sort of defeats the purpose of the wiki (especially on the wikihome page)Moebius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 FWIW I Agree with both of those points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted May 13, 2006 Report Share Posted May 13, 2006 Here's a thought:If you would like to make an alternative main index page (and I think it's a great idea), why not create a link from the main index to a new page called 'AlternateIndex" or something. Make this new page your own! Organize it the way you think it should be organized. Get some user feedback, and make the "right" decision: replace the main index with your alternate index, or abandon it.Personally, I'm a bit more concerned about how fragmented I'm finding the Wiki to be. It is still very young and I am still exploring it, but there are too many pages with one line of info, or with just a link to another page.I'm more concerned about being able to find relevant results by searching than a good index page. But hey - that's me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moebius Posted May 13, 2006 Report Share Posted May 13, 2006 In another post You said "Wiki is lacking" and this sure is the case.Personally, I'm a bit more concerned about how fragmented I'm finding the Wiki to be. It is still very young and I am still exploring it, but there are too many pages with one line of info, or with just a link to another page.Lacking is also a keyword here - there isn't much Wiki specific information yet. My small and stupid mind already has thought of better project specific introductions with "what it can and cannot do", modules needed ect., electronic parts primer, better module descriptions ect. --so I've been lazy.I'd say the fragmentation is mainly caused by lacking. I feel that important pagenames should be kept reserved as bases for more information and links to subpages. When the information get there, it should make it easier to read.Moebius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted May 14, 2006 Report Share Posted May 14, 2006 Again I agree Moebius. You're good at this mate, do you do documentation in your line of work?On another subject, I had a thought today. You know how pages can have a table of contents on the top right corner? I was thinking that it would be great to have something similar, which lists all the pages that link to this one. Would it be possible to automatically generate something like that? It'd be a really good way to navigate around the site, because if a page doesnt have the info you need, you would be hinted at other related pages to help you find it.Edit heh, glad I hadn't clicked 'Post' yet, I just found it, you click the page title and it shows you all the backlinks :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiocommander Posted May 14, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2006 I agree too.It's good having some docs reserved to be filled with information.I was just about filling the application-docs and added a graphic about MIOS to prevent common postings like "can I do this and that with midibox". Maybe there's another one for MBHP following...I think, we just have to take a look at it from the pov of a newbie and at the same time from the pov of our needings to find infos quickly.I'd really like to see the two articles "what is a midibox" and "introduction to uCApps" a bit more expositioned, because I think they contain really useful infos (maybe I'm changing smth there the next days)It's only bugging me a bit, that the FAQs are too splitted, too long, have too much content and some don't really seem to be frequently asked. Maybe it would be useful to avoid filling the faq entries and instead put this information to the relevant sections and do a cleanup there...But all in all, I think we're on a good way The overall navigation has been really improved over the last few weeks. :D:)Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 It's only bugging me a bit, that the FAQs are too splitted, too long, have too much content and some don't really seem to be frequently asked.Absolutely! I went to link to one of the FAQ entries the other day, I knew it was there, but I couldn't find it.... I'll try and move some stuff out of there and into more relevent areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 Hmm you know maybe I was just too tired, or maybe someone already cleaned it up, but I couldn't find one that was a good candidate to move...I'll have a go at fleshing out those other pages though :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.