Talk:Main Page
From TSOY
Anyone know why the Main Page is showing categories of Zaru, Maldor, and Khale? I don't see why it would be--Dave Younce 06:49, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
Funny, I was just about to open this Talk page for ongoing project coordination and questions. Dave beat me to it. I'm not sure about the categories- probably a mistake.
It looks like all that's left to do is to verify content according to the revised edition- have we established a category for that, to show what's been checked and what hasn't? Segedy 06:53, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
So far I've been making a note on the Talk pages for each article I've checked. A category would be much more sensible. Anyhow, I've checked the sections on Ammeni, Qek, Zaru, and Khale line by line and they match (apart from where I've made some small errata edits - replacing "attributes" with "pools" where I noticed them mainly). Steve Y 07:25, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
Okay, how about we add a "TSOY 2005" category to checked pages, to clearly identify those that match the revised edition. Alternately, I could create a Table of Contents page and we could go through it and make notes about which pages have been checked, keeping it all in one place. Clinton? Segedy 07:37, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
Is there an easy way to say "show me all pages in Core that don't have the category 'EditingComplete'?" I like the idea of stamping pages with a category once they're edited, but I don't know how to generate the list of unedited content.
Also, I prefer "EditingComplete" over "TSOY 2005," mainly because I plan to later clean up the text without changing rules, which will take it out of sync with the 2005 version of the text. --CRNixon 08:04, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
I'll follow your lead. I've never worked on a wiki before and really have very little idea as to what I'm doing! I'm mainly just copying you guys. Clinton, I'll just mention that I've made a few very small changes to the text which differ from the book - I've changed "attributes" to "pools" where I've noticed them, and re-worded a couple of secrets (uz and zu - where they included the cost in the text,I've moved it to the end) That's pretty much it, but I can change that back if you want an exact replica for now SteveY 08:16, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
SteveY, no problem. Your changes are fine. --CRNixon 09:08, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
Dave, I'm interested in the change from transclusion to semantics- could you explain the reasoning? I'm just curious about the differences, as I mess with wikis in my day job. Segedy 20:17, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
Steve, one of the things I love most about the semantic mediawiki stuff is the power it has to keep lists current, and let you treat pages as database rows for purposes of querying. To whit, the page I just put together called All Core Keys, which has the inline semantic query: <ask limit="30" default="No Keys Found" mainlabel="Key Name" sort="Group" link="all"> [[Category:Keys]] [[Source::Core]] [[Group::+]] [[Group::*]] [[Summary::*]] [[Key XP::*]] [[Buyoff::*]] </ask>
As new keys are annotated, they'll automatically add to that table if they meet the criteria. With the relatively small core text, maintainability like this wouldn't be a problem, but as users add their own Keys, Secrets, Abilities, etc, having that kind of automated querying and collation could be quite handy. Transclusion still makes total sense for portions of chapters being broken out, like the Bringing Down the Pain Example. But semantically annotating Crunchy Bits allows you to do things like ask for all abilities that use Vigor, or (imagining down the line a little) what the main agricultural products are in each of the Near cultures. It's far from perfect, but it allows for interesting emergent uses in terms of what people can do with the information encoded here. All that said, it may not be what's best for the online TSOY wiki. Certainly if you or Clinton or anyone think that it detracts from the presentation, I don't want to interfere with that vision. --Dave Younce 20:42, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
Thanks Dave- that's really interesting. I hadn't messed around with the semantic plugin for mediawiki, but it's an interesting tool. I don't know if it interferes with this project or not- I suppose that depends on what Clinton has in mind for down the road. Cheers, Segedy 21:27, 15 October 2007 (PDT)
