|
|
Posted by David Segall on 05/26/06 17:35
Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote:
>David Segall wrote:
>> they might not produce a web
>> page of their own that illuminates a tiny corner of the subject area
>> that would otherwise remain in the dark.
>
>How is the latter a consequence of having a wiki? Do you feel that
>private ownership of such a page is necessary for it to work? Why?
Because people are willing to publish some unfinished or arcane
information on their own web site. They would not submit it to a
"public" site because that would imply that the author thought the
work was polished and/or generally useful. I would still be waiting
for Nick Coughlin to put the final touches to a page that I found
extremely useful <http://nrkn.com/backgroundWidth/>. He quickly
constructed the page in response a question I asked in this group. The
world would never see a page on my web site
<http://profectus.com.au/ee_cloudscape.html>. Don't bother to look at
it; you _really_ won't be interested.
>> Almost all the information needed about web authoring is
>> already available. Google does an adequate job of making the
>> information accessible so there is no need for another web site on the
>> subject.
>
>You appear to be arguing on both sides on the fence. One one side
>you're claiming this, and on the other you seem to think that
>individuals should just continue to create their own websites about web
>authoring.
You asked contributors to this group to work on a new web site that I
believe will merely replicate information that is already widely
available. I think we are better served if they stick to writing the
pages that they feel strongly about.
>Indeed, IMO a wiki could _reduce_ the number of new web authoring
>websites people create.
>
>Case in point: If the wiki idea goes ahead, then I may well migrate the
>web authoring section of my Unofficial FAQs site into it.
I resile. You have the idea, you have some content and a server so why
not start it? My _only_ objection was to your desire to recruit some
contributors from this group that I thought would be better employed
elsewhere.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|