Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

James Mohr-3
Hi All!

There is a lot of discussion both here and the MWUsers forum about how to
perform specific tasks, code to change, etc. However, I have been looking for
a discussion of the more theorectical aspects of MediaWiki and Wikis in
general. For example, when to use Namespaces or Prefixes on article names,
what limits to set on using categories, how to use categories, etc, etc.

If there is a discussion of this type somewhere I would appreaciate it if
someone could point me in the right direction. If not, are there people who
would be interested in participating in such a discussion?

Regards,

jimmo

--
---------------------------------------
"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your
character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others
think you are." -- John Wooden
---------------------------------------
Be sure to visit the Linux Tutorial:  http://www.linux-tutorial.info
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

Bugzilla from sy1234@gmail.com
On 6/10/06, James Mohr <[hidden email]> wrote:
> If there is a discussion of this type somewhere I would appreaciate it if
> someone could point me in the right direction. If not, are there people who
> would be interested in participating in such a discussion?

I would think that somewhere there's a heated discussion on this..
probably archived somewhere in meta.  However if there isn't, or it's
dated and disorganized then I'd be willing to participate.

My angle is a huge amount of "knowledge" with only a few users (mostly
just me).  I hate categories, and try to avoid lists, but string
things together with small lists, searchability and breadcrumb links.
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

Morten Blaabjerg
In reply to this post by James Mohr-3
James,

This is a topic which interests me as well. I don't know of any forum other
than this list, in fact I find it a perfect spot for this kind of
discussion. Only if we know better what kind of directions we want wikis and
MediaWiki in particular to take - the better will the developers know which
kind of code solutions and architectures to pursue. So I welcome this sort
of discussion.

I will have a go at some points which I feel need to be adressed (and some,
which are currently being adressed).

Our wiki is used as a combination of knowledge repository, collaborative
works, articles, images and notes storage room, networking tool, news site
(sort of) and as an index of websites and projects, companies, organizations
and individuals - all related to the culture and media landscape in the
broadest sense.

It is currently only available in Danish - and one of the next big
challenges will be to introduce new languages, english in an international
version in particular. I am following with great interest the project of
working-in an multi-lingual architecture into MediaWiki, using just one
database - as I feel this has the promise of simplyfying a great many
things. We don't want users to spread their activities over several wikis -
we want one user base to maintain the complete wiki over several languages,
across languages. The proposed solution with a single page being available
in several top language-namespaces sounds very promising. I wonder how far
off this project is?

One other thing on our wishlist, is better control over categories and
namespaces. Adding categories to a page could be a lot easier. The same goes
for changing a page's namespace, and defining how category content is
displayed and sorted on category pages, other than the alphabetical order
(pages sorted after namespace, content, beginning paragraph, most popular
etc). An easier upload procedure, as has been suggested on the list
previously also would be nice.

But this is just a wishlist. MediaWiki has only just started and I am
confident that the software will only just improve and be even more flexible
and powerful in time. It already is a pretty potent piece of software.

I have had a great time introducing the use of categories for real on our
site, and we're only just beginning. I've made the Special:Categories page
into a sitemap, which is linked to from all categorized pages. Only problem
is that our top-level categories doesn't link to the new sitemap, since they
do not belong in any category. Of course, I could (and probably will) simply
solve this by creating a category of 'top-level categories' ;-)

I would like to hear other experiences with and about the architecture of
MediaWiki.

Best wishes,
Morten :-)

--
Crews Cut Production
Morten Blaabjerg
Danmarksgade 97 - DK-5000 Odense C
Tlf. 65 90 60 88 / 51 80 91 55
http://morten.crewscut.com
[hidden email]


----- Original Message -----
From: "James Mohr" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 2:52 PM
Subject: [Mediawiki-l] Knowledge Management and MediaWiki


> Hi All!
>
> There is a lot of discussion both here and the MWUsers forum about how to
> perform specific tasks, code to change, etc. However, I have been looking
> for
> a discussion of the more theorectical aspects of MediaWiki and Wikis in
> general. For example, when to use Namespaces or Prefixes on article names,
> what limits to set on using categories, how to use categories, etc, etc.
>
> If there is a discussion of this type somewhere I would appreaciate it if
> someone could point me in the right direction. If not, are there people
> who
> would be interested in participating in such a discussion?
>
> Regards,
>
> jimmo
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> "Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your
> character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what
> others
> think you are." -- John Wooden
> ---------------------------------------
> Be sure to visit the Linux Tutorial:  http://www.linux-tutorial.info
> _______________________________________________
> MediaWiki-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
>


_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

James Mohr-3
On Sunday 11 June 2006 02:48, Morten Blaabjerg wrote:

>
> This is a topic which interests me as well. I don't know of any forum other
> than this list, in fact I find it a perfect spot for this kind of
> discussion. Only if we know better what kind of directions we want wikis
> and MediaWiki in particular to take - the better will the developers know
> which kind of code solutions and architectures to pursue. So I welcome this
> sort of discussion.
>
> I will have a go at some points which I feel need to be adressed (and some,
> which are currently being adressed).
>
> Our wiki is used as a combination of knowledge repository, collaborative
> works, articles, images and notes storage room, networking tool, news site
> (sort of) and as an index of websites and projects, companies,
> organizations and individuals - all related to the culture and media
> landscape in the broadest sense.

That's more or less what we are doing. I work as a system
administrator/operator/help desk for a company that provides software for
online brokers as well as manages a number of datacenters for various
customers. We have about 20 different customers, each with their own
environments. A few are online brokers with two dozens machines in several
network segements spread across multiple physical locations, connection to a
dozen external systems,and so forth. At the other end are small Webshops with
a single machine and an extra cold-standby.

All told, we have over 1000 pieces of hardware that we manage. The asset
management is done with a help desk tool, but it isn't set up to store things
like configuration and troubleshooting information at the level we need it.

We have over 150 different applications/programs that we use in one way or
another. These rangein complexity from things like Oracle and MySQL to rsync.
However, we are all expected to know how to configure, manage and
troubleshoot each of these applications (plus the hardware).

Then we have all of the administrative information like how to open service
calls, who to notify at the customer's site when something happens, what to
pay attention to in our daily datacenter walk-throughs.

One obviously important aspect is find the information again. Currently we
store things in MS-Word Documents using Visual Source Safe. Independant of
problems storing information in monolithic documents like MS-Word, there is
the problem of checking the out of VSS, editing them and checking them back
in. Not to forget is the fact that only the department head and team leaders
can add documents to VSS. That makes adding new information to this pool
cumbersome at best. As a result people are less willing to store information
there and either have their own repository (mine was in HTML files) or they
simply don't write anything down.

> It is currently only available in Danish - and one of the next big
> challenges will be to introduce new languages, english in an international
> version in particular. I am following with great interest the project of
> working-in an multi-lingual architecture into MediaWiki, using just one
> database - as I feel this has the promise of simplyfying a great many
> things. We don't want users to spread their activities over several wikis -
> we want one user base to maintain the complete wiki over several languages,
> across languages. The proposed solution with a single page being available
> in several top language-namespaces sounds very promising. I wonder how far
> off this project is?

My Wiki at home is in English and the one at work is in German. For us, there
is no need to have multiple languages. However, I also run the Linux Tutorial
(link below) and have been considering moving it to a wiki. I have been
working on the idea of having it available in multiple languages. One
important things for me would be to have those part which are not yet
translated into a specific language still appear in English. Or maybe a user
configuration option that switches this on/off.

> One other thing on our wishlist, is better control over categories and
> namespaces. Adding categories to a page could be a lot easier. The same
> goes for changing a page's namespace, and defining how category content is
> displayed and sorted on category pages, other than the alphabetical order
> (pages sorted after namespace, content, beginning paragraph, most popular
> etc). An easier upload procedure, as has been suggested on the list
> previously also would be nice.

It would be nice if the admin could define a set of categories which are then
available from a drop-down menu. Alternatively, you could have a set of links
on the edit page and clicking on them uses Javascript to insert the necessary
text into the form.

Personally, I good enough with cut-n-paste that I don't see it as a big
problem. However, currently anyone can create a new category and you
typically end up with a mess. For example, you have the categories
Application and Applications. With a menu the admin could ensure that the
name are consistant.

> But this is just a wishlist. MediaWiki has only just started and I am
> confident that the software will only just improve and be even more
> flexible and powerful in time. It already is a pretty potent piece of
> software.

At this point I am not too worried about the flexibility since it is open
source and I am well-enough versed in PHP to make changes myself. :-)
However, I agree with you that it will improve as time goes by. Considering
how useful it already is, I am anxious to see how it is in a couple of years.

I would like to see is better seach capabilities. It would be nice to be able
to seach by category as well as a little more intelligence. For example, on
my personal wiki I have a page that described what directories are backed up
and how. So, I search for "backup" and nothing is found. I need to search for
"backups". (or is this a problem with my site?)

> I have had a great time introducing the use of categories for real on our
> site, and we're only just beginning. I've made the Special:Categories page
> into a sitemap, which is linked to from all categorized pages. Only problem
> is that our top-level categories doesn't link to the new sitemap, since
> they do not belong in any category. Of course, I could (and probably will)
> simply solve this by creating a category of 'top-level categories' ;-)

The idea of a site map is not a bad idea. There is obviously a lot of manual
work to do (or not?), but that offers one more method of finding the
information. I have run into the argument that the information **has to** be
stored hierarchically. That there is some absolute requirement somewhere.
Granted humans natually put things into categories, but I see that most of
the belief that things must be in hierarchies is because that is the way we
are used to storing files on hard disks. Thus we store files for our web
servers like that. Also, up to now, most web sites have had some kind of
hierarchy due to limited search mechanisms.

I am not exactly sure what you mean by "top-level categories doesn't link to
the new sitemap, since they do not belong in any category." What would be a
top-level category on your site where you do not yet have wiki categories. I
am asking because we are working on a start page with various blocks for "top
level" categories. For example, administration, technical, customer, etc. To
some extent, these are too vague to put into wiki categories, so I am not
sure if it really makes sense to create wiki categories.

<snip>

What I would like to see is a hook that allows easy access to other data
sources. For example, as I mentioned we have a help desk tool which keep
tracks of assets, customer organizations and people, service contracts
(internal and external) and so forth. It would be nice to be able to pull
things directly out of the database.  For example, on a given customer's
start page, there is a tag {{ServiceDeskCI:MaschineName}} that pulls specific
information for the configuration item (asset) or
{{ServiceDeskCustomer:CustomerName}} which pulls specific customer
information.

Another thing is printing of lots of articles. We have a requirement to
deliver a handbook to certain customers once a month (whether things have
changed or not). Since we currently use MS-Word, it is fairly straight
forward to create a PDF. Although I have written a script to convert the HTML
pages on the Linux Tutorial to a PDF and it would be fairly easy to create a
script that pulls pages out of the wiki, parses them and passes them to the
same mechanism, it would be nice if this was built in. There was a post on
the MW users forum from someone who creates "site books". To me, this would
be another good use of a process like this. Granted something like that is
not the goal of a wiki, but more like DocBook. However, DocBook does not have
nearly the same features as MediaWiki and I see it would be harder to make
DocBook fit for our needs like a Wiki as opposed to making a wiki do things
that DocBook does (note that the DocBook knowledge base is a wiki and does
not use DocBook itself).

regards,

jimmo
--
---------------------------------------
"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your
character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others
think you are." -- John Wooden
---------------------------------------
Be sure to visit the Linux Tutorial:  http://www.linux-tutorial.info
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

James Mohr-3
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from sy1234@gmail.com
On Saturday 10 June 2006 21:36, Sy Ali wrote:

> On 6/10/06, James Mohr <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > If there is a discussion of this type somewhere I would appreaciate it if
> > someone could point me in the right direction. If not, are there people
> > who would be interested in participating in such a discussion?
>
> I would think that somewhere there's a heated discussion on this..
> probably archived somewhere in meta.  However if there isn't, or it's
> dated and disorganized then I'd be willing to participate.
>
> My angle is a huge amount of "knowledge" with only a few users (mostly
> just me).  I hate categories, and try to avoid lists, but string
> things together with small lists, searchability and breadcrumb links.

I am in a situation where the more different ways to find the things the
better. I found that one of the most exciting things about MW is that there
are many  different ways to find the information. You like the self-made
lists and searches, which we also use. However, we manage over 1000 pieces of
equipement so we need to quickly find everything related to a particular
topics, so the categories are important. What I really like is being about to
simply type the name of the article in the URL (even  without the underlines)
and it will find the correct article. (or allow you to create it right
there).

regards,

jimmo

--
---------------------------------------
"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your
character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others
think you are." -- John Wooden
---------------------------------------
Be sure to visit the Linux Tutorial:  http://www.linux-tutorial.info
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

Ashar Voultoiz-2
James Mohr wrote:
<snip>
> What I really like is being about to simply type the name of the
> article in the URL (even  without the underlines) and it will find
> the correct article. (or allow you to create it right there).

You can append some keywords after Special:Search :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/foobar_variable

You can use a space instead of the underscore. So you can probably use
some mod_rewrite stuff to have:

http//yourwikihost/search/  redirect to special search :)

--
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/
IM: [hidden email]  ICQ: 15325080

_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

James Mohr-3
On Sunday 11 June 2006 13:37, Ashar Voultoiz wrote:

> James Mohr wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > What I really like is being about to simply type the name of the
> > article in the URL (even  without the underlines) and it will find
> > the correct article. (or allow you to create it right there).
>
> You can append some keywords after Special:Search :
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/foobar_variable
>
> You can use a space instead of the underscore. So you can probably use
> some mod_rewrite stuff to have:
>
> http//yourwikihost/search/  redirect to special search :)

Now that's a nifty little trick. Thanks!

regards,

jimmo

--
---------------------------------------
"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your
character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others
think you are." -- John Wooden
---------------------------------------
Be sure to visit the Linux Tutorial:  http://www.linux-tutorial.info
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

Morten Blaabjerg
In reply to this post by James Mohr-3
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Mohr" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

> (...)
> The idea of a site map is not a bad idea. There is obviously a lot of
> manual
> work to do (or not?), but that offers one more method of finding the
> information. I have run into the argument that the information **has to**
> be
> stored hierarchically. That there is some absolute requirement somewhere.
> Granted humans natually put things into categories, but I see that most of
> the belief that things must be in hierarchies is because that is the way
> we
> are used to storing files on hard disks. Thus we store files for our web
> servers like that. Also, up to now, most web sites have had some kind of
> hierarchy due to limited search mechanisms.
>
> I am not exactly sure what you mean by "top-level categories doesn't link
> to
> the new sitemap, since they do not belong in any category." What would be
> a
> top-level category on your site where you do not yet have wiki categories.
> I
> am asking because we are working on a start page with various blocks for
> "top
> level" categories. For example, administration, technical, customer, etc.
> To
> some extent, these are too vague to put into wiki categories, so I am not
> sure if it really makes sense to create wiki categories.
> (...)

At first I tried to develop a useredited sitemap/index, which clearly has
the advantage of providing additional information on the pages linked to. In
effect though, this is clearly often not updated effectively enough,
especially on a smaller wiki.

So, I decided to have a go at using categories more efficiently. I edited
the text at "Special:Categories" to contain our top-level categories - as
well as all categories in the wiki (which are included automatically on this
special-page).

Our top-level categories are "Cultural Networks" (which covers everything
from rockbands and periodicals to global media institutions and broadcast
networks), "Persons" (all pages on individual artists, theorists, directors
etc.), "Cultural Productions" (which covers every single publication, song
or film in the wiki)... etc. My idea is that all pages belonging to a
subcategory will also belong to one of these top-level categories, so
effectively all pages in the wiki is in a category. We also employ more
subject-oriented indexing categories, which are much more diverse, spreading
over several namespaces and across other categories. These are completely
non-hierarchical. It is of course also possible for pages to coexist, say in
both a "network" category and a "cultural works" category - in the case of a
periodical for instance, which is a publication, yet also an editorial
institution. The top-level categories are very vague, yet deliberately cut
out to describe the different kinds of content we have and want in the wiki.
They also have the purpose to simply display the mass of, as well as what
kind of information is in the wiki, for users and visitors(which can
otherwise be difficult to get an overview of).

The only (minor) problem with using "Special:Categories" as a sitemap is,
that since our top-level categories aren't themselves in any category, they
won't automatically give a link back to the Special:Categories (our sitemap)
page (as all pages or categories in a category do). This is a minor issue,
really, one which I expect could be solved comparatively easy (if by no
other way, then just by inserting this link manually).

What would be vastly more interesting, is to have more customizable category
pages - for instance, entries in a category being able to display data on
the pages in the category at a glance (say the first two lines of wikitext
on a page, latest author, page views), as well as sorting the pages in the
category for display after userchosen criteria. "Show me the latest edited
pages in this category" - "Show me the most popular pages in this
category" - "Show me only pages from this namespace, this date interval"
etc... What I guess I am talking about is combining the very efficient
cross-non-hierarchical category system with the MySQL requests of what is
now hidden in very "blocky" and "not-so-flexible" Specialpages (which only
is used for the wiki as a whole, and for the primary namespace in
particular). Ideally I want all the functionality of the specialpages to be
enabled for each category, each namespace and for all files in the wiki.
This could be implemented with an expanded dropdown menu system, which is
already in place for several Specialpages.

This kind of expanded functionality would make MediaWiki ultimately the most
powerful indexing tool you could find ever.

I know this kind of functionality will probably not find its way into
Wikipedia at present, because it will constitute too great server loads etc.
But in the long run, I am not so worried about server load issues. On
smaller wikis the load times will probably be less of a problem, and you
could make this kind of indexing functionality optional, to be dis/enabled
in the localsettings.

Best wishes,
Morten :-)

--
Crews Cut Production
Morten Blaabjerg
Danmarksgade 97 - DK-5000 Odense C
Tlf. 65 90 60 88 / 51 80 91 55
http://morten.crewscut.com
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

Raj Shekhar-2
In reply to this post by James Mohr-3
in infinite wisdom James Mohr spoke thus  On 06/11/2006 01:08 PM:

>
> What I would like to see is a hook that allows easy access to other data
> sources. For example, as I mentioned we have a help desk tool which keep
> tracks of assets, customer organizations and people, service contracts
> (internal and external) and so forth. It would be nice to be able to pull
> things directly out of the database.  

You can use the Special:Export page to get the xml version of a page.

This can serve as a REST interface to your wiki (if you know exactly
what you are looking for). For example -
http://dtil.info/index.php/Special:Export/Main_Page gives me the xml
version of the "Main page" of my wiki and
http://dtil.info/index.php/Special:Export/Help:Contents gives me the
contents of the "Help" page.  You can use this to query the mediawiki
database and use that data in your own program.  More details here
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Export .

Cheers
--
raj shekhar
facts: http://rajshekhar.net | opinions: http://rajshekhar.net/blog
WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE  -- God's Last Message to his Creation
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

James Mohr-3
In reply to this post by Morten Blaabjerg
On Monday 12 June 2006 12:02, Morten Blaabjerg wrote:
<original snipped>

> At first I tried to develop a useredited sitemap/index, which clearly has
> the advantage of providing additional information on the pages linked to.
> In effect though, this is clearly often not updated effectively enough,
> especially on a smaller wiki.

That does not surprise me. First people will have their own perception of what
is a "good" organization. In my experience, either you make the site map be
automatic or you have someone manage it or a combination of both

You always need an owner who takes responsibility for things. The way we have
it organized is that for each area there is a "expert" and a backup. The
expert either fills the KB or ensure that it gets done for his/her area.
He/she is also responsible for reviewing the material. Even on projects as
big as the Wikipedia, there are people who review articles. Potentially you
could have a TOC for aspecific area which are created by the owner/expert and
them simply include automatically into the larger site map.

> So, I decided to have a go at using categories more efficiently. I edited
> the text at "Special:Categories" to contain our top-level categories - as
> well as all categories in the wiki (which are included automatically on
> this special-page).

Sounds responsable.

> Our top-level categories are "Cultural Networks" (which covers everything
> from rockbands and periodicals to global media institutions and broadcast
> networks), "Persons" (all pages on individual artists, theorists, directors
> etc.), "Cultural Productions" (which covers every single publication, song
> or film in the wiki)... etc. My idea is that all pages belonging to a
> subcategory will also belong to one of these top-level categories, so
> effectively all pages in the wiki is in a category.

Why can't these be real categories?

> We also employ more
> subject-oriented indexing categories, which are much more diverse,
> spreading over several namespaces and across other categories. These are
> completely non-hierarchical. It is of course also possible for pages to
> coexist, say in both a "network" category and a "cultural works" category -
> in the case of a periodical for instance, which is a publication, yet also
> an editorial institution.

That's very similar to the way we are setting up things. However, we are
planning to "force" a little hierarchy into the structure because that is
what a lot of people expect and to ensure standardization. A good example
would be Database_Troubleshooting exists in both the database and
troubleshooting categories. However, we have *defined* database to be at a
higher level than troubleshooting. Therefore the main page is
Database_Troubleshooting and if someone wants to create the page
Troubleshooting_Databases it is *required* to redirect to
Database_Troubleshooting. The customers are even higher, so the main page
would be CustomerName_Database_Troubleshooting and so on.

This ensures that on Special:Allpages things are automatically organized
hierarchically. At least to some extent.  

> The top-level categories are very vague, yet
> deliberately cut out to describe the different kinds of content we have and
> want in the wiki. They also have the purpose to simply display the mass of,
> as well as what kind of information is in the wiki, for users and
> visitors(which can otherwise be difficult to get an overview of).

That seems to be similar to the way the Wikipedia Portal works.

> The only (minor) problem with using "Special:Categories" as a sitemap is,
> that since our top-level categories aren't themselves in any category, they
> won't automatically give a link back to the Special:Categories (our
> sitemap) page (as all pages or categories in a category do). This is a
> minor issue, really, one which I expect could be solved comparatively easy
> (if by no other way, then just by inserting this link manually).

Look into sub-categories:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category#Subcategories

That might provide a different solution. I am not saying your's is wrong, just
offering up an alternative.

> What would be vastly more interesting, is to have more customizable
> category pages - for instance, entries in a category being able to display
> data on the pages in the category at a glance (say the first two lines of
> wikitext on a page, latest author, page views), as well as sorting the
> pages in the category for display after userchosen criteria. "Show me the
> latest edited pages in this category" - "Show me the most popular pages in
> this
> category" - "Show me only pages from this namespace, this date interval"
> etc... What I guess I am talking about is combining the very efficient
> cross-non-hierarchical category system with the MySQL requests of what is
> now hidden in very "blocky" and "not-so-flexible" Specialpages (which only
> is used for the wiki as a whole, and for the primary namespace in
> particular). Ideally I want all the functionality of the specialpages to be
> enabled for each category, each namespace and for all files in the wiki.
> This could be implemented with an expanded dropdown menu system, which is
> already in place for several Specialpages.

Well, you've gone beyond my experience with MediaWiki. Naturally, you could
create a hack yourself to give you the functionality.

There is already the ability to create dynamic article lists:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_Article_List

One parameters is which is the "Name of category where (including its
children) all articles reside". This might be what you are looking for. If
you sort by hits, you get the most popular articles in the category.

> This kind of expanded functionality would make MediaWiki ultimately the
> most powerful indexing tool you could find ever.

I think it is getting there. As more people like us add their ideas about how
to acces information and potentially our own hacks and add-ons, I see it
coming. The only thing I see blocking it is some people's perception that it
should stay a tool to create KBs like the Wikipedia. That is more or less
"random" information. In my job, the information is much more "directed." I
might even be tempted to say "solution oriented".

> I know this kind of functionality will probably not find its way into
> Wikipedia at present, because it will constitute too great server loads
> etc. But in the long run, I am not so worried about server load issues. On
> smaller wikis the load times will probably be less of a problem, and you
> could make this kind of indexing functionality optional, to be dis/enabled
> in the localsettings.

Personally, I think the load would be minimal with the right indexes.

--
---------------------------------------
"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your
character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others
think you are." -- John Wooden
---------------------------------------
Be sure to visit the Linux Tutorial:  http://www.linux-tutorial.info
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Knowledge Management and MediaWiki

James Mohr-3
In reply to this post by Raj Shekhar-2
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 04:38, Raj Shekhar wrote:

> in infinite wisdom James Mohr spoke thus  On 06/11/2006 01:08 PM:
> > What I would like to see is a hook that allows easy access to other data
> > sources. For example, as I mentioned we have a help desk tool which keep
> > tracks of assets, customer organizations and people, service contracts
> > (internal and external) and so forth. It would be nice to be able to pull
> > things directly out of the database.
>
> You can use the Special:Export page to get the xml version of a page.
>
> This can serve as a REST interface to your wiki (if you know exactly
> what you are looking for). For example -
> http://dtil.info/index.php/Special:Export/Main_Page gives me the xml
> version of the "Main page" of my wiki and
> http://dtil.info/index.php/Special:Export/Help:Contents gives me the
> contents of the "Help" page.  You can use this to query the mediawiki
> database and use that data in your own program.  More details here
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Export .
>
> Cheers

Sorry, we need to go the *other* way. That is, pull data out of the asset
database and drop it into the Wiki.

--
---------------------------------------
"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your
character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others
think you are." -- John Wooden
---------------------------------------
Be sure to visit the Linux Tutorial:  http://www.linux-tutorial.info
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l