To find and post info, code, or help-wanted ads, try PickWiki
Tony Gravagno
http://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Employment
Note links there to MultiValueConsultants page, UserGroups, a list of
other forums on the Community page, PickJobs.net, and other resources.
There are many resources in this market for posting and finding work.
If you need help, let me know.
Tony Gravagno
Nebula Research and Development
TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com
Nebula R&D sells mv.NET and other Pick/MultiValue products
worldwide, and provides related development services
remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog
Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute!
NEW: http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno
Kevin Powick
<address.is.in.po...@removethis.com.invalid> wrote:
> Seehttp://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Employment
I know that a lot of work has been put into the content of PickWiki,
so I'm not trying to take away anything from the selfless efforts of
you and others. However, I really find the format of PickWiki
uninspiring to say the least.
Maybe the extremely minimalist format is intended, but IMO, there are
wiki packages out there, including FOSS, that do a much better job of
presentation, navigation, etc.
Whenever I go to PickWiki, I can only look at it for about 2 minutes
before I just can't read it any more.
--
Kevin Powick
dawn
I have a similar "feeling" when I go there, in spite of a real desire
to make it highly useful. If someone could take an run with it and get
others on board with the plan, it seems to me that moving both cdp and
pickwiki to a google groups wiki+discussion list would give us a
better user experience and more potential for use. That could
potentially entice third party vendors to participate more too, given
the nicer "look and feel." I agree that I appreciate the work put
into the content of pickwiki, even though for me it falls short on the
user experience site. Just my two cents. --dawn
>
> --
> Kevin Powick
Tony Gravagno
experience and thus the perceived value of the resource. On that
basis I'll side with you guys about 80%. So please flow with the
following comments, I'm not disagreeing, just sharing thoughts.
On the other hand I feel like this is a "we can't sell character UI
because people insist on a pretty GUI" scenario. Well, we're the
consumers here, so "pretty" shouldn't be such a big deal.
Those are just my sentiments. Here are the more practical aspects.
Ian McGowan owns the site, I just contribute like anyone here can, and
some people here do. Rex Gozar motivated me to contribute with this
page:
<http://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Getting_Personal_With_PickWiki>
Rex and I have exchanged notes with Ian about things like adding a
forum and other features, changing and improving the software,
re-hosting, etc. Ian's raison d'�tre for creating the site is
documented here:
http://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Ian_McGowan
That intent doesn't match the way the site is used today. It's my
understanding that he doesn't want to change the software or
structure. Everyone is free to use it, but to use it as it is. So
for now, that's pretty much where it stands. We (community) don't
have any control over this.
My main concern in those discussions was that this really valuable
community resource was in the hands of one person at one site, and
some disaster could destroy that resource for everyone. Ian
recognized the problem and since that time, Rex and I are now both
CC'ed with weekly backups of the site, for use only if something bad
should happen. I'm happy with that as a first, though perhaps only
major change that we may get for this site, and I thank Ian for that
"put the community first" gesture.
I try to choose my battles carefully and this is one that I've chosen
not to continue to fight. PickWiki is, and has greater potential to
be an excellent repository for indexed information of all kinds about
this Pick/MV product base and the community. I will continue to use,
improve, and recommend the site, and I hope others do the same. For
now, I encourage everyone to just keep adding content. Don't let
aesthetics interfere with your desire to contribute to the resource.
Perhaps at some other time in the future we'll get a chance to re-host
it in a medium that doesn't hurt more sensitive eyes. ;)
All that said, I'll point Ian and Rex here and maybe they'll have a
completely different take on the topic.
Best,
T
mdsi2000
<address.is.in.po...@removethis.com.invalid> wrote:
> For the average person a more attractive presentation can improve the
> experience and thus the perceived value of the resource. On that
> basis I'll side with you guys about 80%. So please flow with the
> following comments, I'm not disagreeing, just sharing thoughts.
>
> On the other hand I feel like this is a "we can't sell character UI
> because people insist on a pretty GUI" scenario. Well, we're the
> consumers here, so "pretty" shouldn't be such a big deal.
>
> Those are just my sentiments. Here are the more practical aspects.
>
> Ian McGowan owns the site, I just contribute like anyone here can, and
> some people here do. Rex Gozar motivated me to contribute with this
> page:
> <http://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Getting_Personal_With_PickWiki>
> Rex and I have exchanged notes with Ian about things like adding a
> forum and other features, changing and improving the software,
I see Pickwiki as a technical resource for the MV professional. Not as
a promotional tool to sell the database. Therefore, screen colours and
fancy fonts don't really matter to me.
-Peter G.
Kevin Powick
>
> I see Pickwiki as a technical resource for the MV professional. Not as
> a promotional tool to sell the database. Therefore, screen colours and
> fancy fonts don't really matter to me.
A "fancy" page is not the point, IMO. I'm a big fan of white papers
because I want information. However, even a white paper can have good
or poor presentation quality.
PickWiki might be a good resource, but digging through it will only be
a last resort for me. And if using some type of wiki markup is
required to contribute, it's another strike against it for encouraging
participation.
--
Kevin Powick
Tony Gravagno
Well, markup is in the fabric of wiki, and we're not going to get
around that with a different wiki package. Again, I'm in agreement
with both sides, and Professional <> Fancy, but a better balance is
desirable compared to what's there now.
Kevin, I'm getting two things from you here:
1) Searchability
2) Presentation
The search is adequate but of course can only return content from the
pages. One way people can contribute is simply by editing a page and
adding tag words at the bottom of pages to make searches more
effective. Just make up a standard and there probably won't be any
dissent. I propose a simple line a the bottom of the page followed by
the word "Tags:" or "Keywords:" and whatever words people happen to
think of. Adding words that are already in the page is redundant, but
if the page includes notes on the BASIC, value would be added with
"Tag: COMPILE CATALOG compilation" etc
Contributions to wiki can be made in diverse ways. It's not just
about "I don't know enough about Foo to write an article". It's also
about "That article should have some keywords, they misspelled BSAIC,
and the headings should be bold".
So with regard to presentation, people are welcome to enhance the
presentation on any page with judicious use of text sizing, putting
blocks into more readable paragraphs, adding bullets, and other more
aesthetic changes.
Feel free to create a new page that establishes an aesthetic standard
for the site and I'll contribute to implementing an agreed-upon
standard (with all the free time I have for beautification
projects...). For now the only limitation is that we need to work
within the limitations of the environment.
Learning wiki markup is trivial. Every page has examples. Just find
a page that looks like what you want and go to Edit mode to see the
source, then do the same in some page you want to edit.
Personally I'd like to see a sidebar, images, alternative and expanded
markup syntax, and other features that are typical in other wiki
packages. I would even support moving PickWiki into a CMS like
Drupal. But until we get that in discussion with Ian and with respect
for his wishes with this resource, again, there's lots that can be
done with the content, presentation, and the medium as-is.
T
Kevin Powick
<address.is.in.po...@removethis.com.invalid> wrote:
> Well, markup is in the fabric of wiki, and we're not going to get
> around that with a different wiki package.
Yes, you could. Look around. Easy to use wysiwyg editors are now
popular in several wiki packages.
> Kevin, I'm getting two things from you here:
> 1) Searchability
> 2) Presentation
Yes.
TL;DR.
--
Kevin Powick
wjhonson
As long as these "standards" don't actually affect the content portion
of the pages.
Will Johnson
dawn
Why not just put it on google groups and get the wiki and discussion
list, all searchable, etc, with wysiwyg editing, etc? Way back when
Mike started the MultiVallue google group IIRC. It didn't take off,
but we could work with it. I think I'm a moderator. I'm not sure if
Mike is listening here (and I might be forgetting who owns that). We
could start another one too. I certainly know that change is hard and
getting others to change with you is harder, but I don't see pickwiki
being as good a resource as it could be with the current wiki look. I
realize my husband doesn't care about the visuals in our house as much
as I do--some people are more hampered by such things than others are.
Going to google groups would give functionality improvements too, not
just prettiness. It is not moving for the sake of moving, but moving
for the sake of vibrancy that prompts me to suggest it (again).
cheers! --dawn
Tony Gravagno
> Tony Gravagno wrote:
>> The search is adequate but of course can only return content from the
>> pages. 嚙瞌ne way people can contribute is simply by editing a page and
>> adding tag words at the bottom of pages to make searches more
>> effective. 嚙皚ust make up a standard and there probably won't be any
>> dissent. 嚙瘢 propose a simple line a the bottom of the page followed by
>> the word "Tags:" or "Keywords:" and whatever words people happen to
>> think of. 嚙璀dding words that are already in the page is redundant, but
>> if the page includes notes on the BASIC, value would be added with
>> "Tag: COMPILE CATALOG compilation" etc
>
>As long as these "standards" don't actually affect the content portion
>of the pages.
>
>Will Johnson
See an example at the bottom of the Community page:
http://www.pickwiki.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Community
There ya go, there's a new standard that I just made up. That page
will now show up whenever people are looking for a job, contractors,
etc. The idea of the specific wording is that people should be able
to find help and employment through the community. Other pages can be
similarly tagged.
This is completely unobtrusive, and simple enough for anyone to add or
modify. (Personally, I'm glad I made the above change, it seems like
it will be a big help to anyone doing a related search.)
Notice that there is also a new Tags page that explains this feature,
just click the word Tags at the bottom of the Community page.
Compare this to a static site where you have no ability to help others
to find information - welcome to the world of wiki.
I welcome anyone here to take it upon themselves to find untagged
pages, and just start tagging them. (Uh, not with gang slogans in
spraypaint but with keywords) This contribution is as valuable as any
other content or aesthetic enhancement.
HTH
T
Tony Gravagno
>Why not just put it on google groups and get the wiki and discussion
My single vote counts as much as anyone else's here, but I personally
wouldn't want to put this into Google's hands. Google has done a
crappy job of providing a forum interface, email services, and others.
Their forum search has been broken for a year, and while they made a
major announcement about fixing it a couple months ago, I haven't
noticed any differences. Imagine a wiki where search doesn't work
properly. I'm actually a big Google fan but I just don't trust them
at the moment to provide a good wiki interface, and I'm choosey about
what else I trust them with.
But this is a case where we don't need to subscribe to Google's
"software for the masses" approach because there are people in this
community who can easily assume the responsibility for maintenance of
specialty software. A wiki doesn't require a lot of maintenance, and
I for one would be happy to host and support a community resource,
updating it with helpful modules and collaborating with others for
other required and optional maintenance. For anyone hosting a wiki,
Google or otherwise, I would hope to have a resource that's extensible
with helpful plugins, and where we can get period backup copies (as
Ian sends to Rex and me) just in case something bad happens and we
need to rehost - we don't have those freedoms with Google.
That comes back to "why not NuWiki", which after all is stored in a MV
environment and maintained by Pick-based software. Again, my personal
vote on this no, because as with Google we don't own the software or
format. Even if we have data backups, we can't plug the data into any
other package without major data transformation. Whereas with a
common FLOSS package we have full control over the software and data.
But that's just my two pesos...
T
Tony Gravagno
>Tony Gravagno wrote:
>
>> Well, markup is in the fabric of wiki, and we're not going to get
>> around that with a different wiki package.
>
>Yes, you could. Look around. Easy to use wysiwyg editors are now
>popular in several wiki packages.
You're absolutely right. I was thinking about older wiki's based on
the same design and completely neglected to think about more current
offerings.
So we're agreed that better=current software would be a major
improvement, but at the moment we are limited to what's there.
Given the limitations, is it more reasonable to wait for better
software, or to just work with what's there? I tend toward the
latter. Perhaps "reasonable" has nothing to do with it, and it's just
a fact of life that people won't want to use the resource until it
looks more modern.
That's a shame, it would be like "MV isn't a GUI environment so we'll
stop writing applications". Oh yeah, that Is what most people think.
Seriously, I think we've defined the stalemate pretty well and it's
just a matter of choice for people to simple work with what's there or
not.
T
dawn
Ah, but part of the charm of a news group is that "no one" seems to
own it. With a google group, someone would have to set it up and "own"
it, but that could be widely distributed among a group too. If someone
here had the s/w on their machine or maintained the software, as is
done with NuWiki, somehow there is a loss in having that ownership. If
it is on google, it is not too unlike being a newsgroup. It doesn't
feel as proprietary as having a member of the group host or write the
software, even though there is this other proprietary software party
involved (google).
By the way, I did see a change in google search from when it was
REALLY broken, but it isn't where it should be yet. cheers! --dawn
Homer L. Hazel
|Ah, but part of the charm of a news group is that "no one" seems to
|own it. With a google group, someone would have to set it up and "own"
|it, but that could be widely distributed among a group too. If someone
|here had the s/w on their machine or maintained the software, as is
|done with NuWiki, somehow there is a loss in having that ownership. If
|it is on google, it is not too unlike being a newsgroup. It doesn't
|feel as proprietary as having a member of the group host or write the
|software, even though there is this other proprietary software party
|involved (google).
|
|By the way, I did see a change in google search from when it was
|REALLY broken, but it isn't where it should be yet. cheers! --dawn
|
There is one problem with letting someone "OWN" a Google group.
The "OWNER" of the open-source QM development group on
GOOGLE decided they did not like what someone was posting,
(it was a fairly innocuous banter exchange as I remember), so the
"OWNER" of the Google group dis enrolled the offending members.
Larry Hazel
Kevin Powick
<address.is.in.po...@removethis.com.invalid> wrote:
> Given the limitations, is it more reasonable to wait for better
> software, or to just work with what's there?
There does not appear to be a choice.
> Perhaps "reasonable" has nothing to do with it, and it's just
> a fact of life that people won't want to use the resource until it
> looks more modern.
If appearance allows for better navigation, searching, and
understanding, then yes.
> That's a shame, it would be like "MV isn't a GUI environment so we'll
> stop writing applications".
No. You are confusing form over function. PickWiki has little of
either.
> Oh yeah, that Is what most people think.
Says the .Net developer. :-) ... And while it is a different topic,
if one does wish to follow the path of least resistance, it does make
sense to accommodate market demand.
> it's
> just a matter of choice for people to simple work with what's there or
> not.
Sure, but if you're lamenting the lack of participation in PickWiki,
then perhaps the items I've mentioned are worth considering.
--
Kevin Powick
Rex Gozar
PickWiki itself.
A few years ago, I was looking for a Pick programming resource where I
could post my own articles. Nothing fancy, just some personal notes
that might be of interest to others in the community.
I found the PickSource website. A good looking site, looked like it
used phpNuke CMS. It had a whole bunch of features. When I examined
the site it didn't really have much programmer-contributed content,
but it did have a lot of vendor announcements and news stories linking
to other websites.
I found MvDevCentral. Pretty much the same story. CDP and the
various google groups also have a presence, but show sparse and
intermittent participation.
Then I found PickWiki. It had a small Times New Roman font on beige
pages with a cyan header and footer. It wasn't pretty. It didn't have
a CMS mechanism for adding new articles, nor a convenient way to
comment on them. But it did have one thing the others didn't. It had
content. People really put their content into this ugly beige and
cyan website. Real usable content, and not just links to other
websites. With this content, it has the real potential to build up to
"critical mass" where it could become the defacto standard for
publishing articles for the Pick community.
Now other web resources have a lot of usable content too, like CDP and
the u2 users mailing list, but their lack of structure prevents their
use as resource for new Pick programmers. How often have you seen the
same questions asked and answered over and over again? Their very
nature dooms them to that same format forever.
As for making PickWiki more user-friendly and prettier, I'm all for
it, but don't think for a moment that's the "one thing" that will
drive Pick professionals to it or any other site. Much prettier and
more full featured websites have failed, and I think the reasons for
failure have more to do with misunderstanding the dynamics within our
Pick programming community.
If there are specific styling changes you'd like to see, there are a
few options:
(1) PickWiki's user preferences allows you to set your own
stylesheet. Create one you like and test it out. Once you have it
the way you like it, email the url to me and I'll review it with Ian.
If he's okay with it, it will be used for the entire site.
(2) Suggest a website that has the look you're going for. I can try
to simulate its appearance within the constraints of PickWiki. I'll
email you the url so you can try it out in your preferences and tell
me what you think.
(3) PickWiki is a wiki. You can change its organization if you want
to. You can change its formatting if you want to.
rex
Ian McGowan
[snip]
> As for making PickWiki more user-friendly and prettier, I'm all for
> it, but don't think for a moment that's the "one thing" that will
> drive Pick professionals to it or any other site. Much prettier and
> more full featured websites have failed, and I think the reasons for
> failure have more to do with misunderstanding the dynamics within our
> Pick programming community.
An interesting discussion. I have to say thanks to Rex and Tony for
their efforts at sharing their expertise in posts on PickWiki and
speaking up for it here.
Visual appeal is obviously not priority #1 on the site. It's not
important to me, but I can see how a more modern UI would help make
contributing and using the site easier. I've started a page (on the
wiki of course :-) to capture any ideas that come out of this or other
discussions. MediaWiki seems like an obvious alternative to the
current software used.
A bigger question that recurs is that of ownership and direction (or
lack thereof). Making the backups available so folks feel like their
hard work is safe is a small thing to do. Rex has access to the site
hosting the wiki in the event I get hit by a bus. I am open to
suggestions, as long as the site remains independent.
Ian
Tony Gravagno
>(2) Suggest a website that has the look you're going for. I can try
>to simulate its appearance within the constraints of PickWiki.
>
>to. You can change its formatting if you want to.
Rex, all points valid but at the core the software is constrained.
There is only so much that can be done to simulate the look of other
sites, nothing that can be done to reproduce the functionality found
elsewhere.
I see Ian has updated the PickWiki homepage with a reference to this
discussion, as well as a NewWikiIdeas page with a link to MediaWiki.
Heck, I think that's all anyone is asking for. If Ian doesn't mind
migrating to MediaWiki, I think that would be perfect. As far as
functionality goes, the core MediaWiki package is good but there are
over 1400 extensions that people have written for it as well - many of
which would be of value at PickWiki.
I have no problem with Ian's owning this resource - he started it and
stewards it well for all of us. I'd just like to see it get used
more, and it's evident that some people would use it more if it were
more modernized. If that means changing the software and maybe
writing code to move the data to a new format, I'll be happy to help.
I'll even host and maintain it if that's what it takes to allow the
resource to grow.
T
Ian McGowan
<address.is.in.po...@removethis.com.invalid> wrote:
> I see Ian has updated the PickWiki homepage with a reference to this
> discussion, as well as a NewWikiIdeas page with a link to MediaWiki.
> Heck, I think that's all anyone is asking for. If Ian doesn't mind
> migrating to MediaWiki, I think that would be perfect. As far as
> functionality goes, the core MediaWiki package is good but there are
> over 1400 extensions that people have written for it as well - many of
> which would be of value at PickWiki.
So, two votes for mediawiki? :-)
One other thing worth considering is a better format for code
sharing. The wiki format is kind of awkward. Something like google
code, sourceforge, or some other code snippet management tools
perhaps?
http://code.google.com/p/judaw/ for example...
dawn
> On Dec 6, 2:24 pm, Rex Gozar <rgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]> As for making PickWiki more user-friendly and prettier, I'm all for
> > it, but don't think for a moment that's the "one thing" that will
> > drive Pick professionals to it or any other site. Much prettier and
> > more full featured websites have failed, and I think the reasons for
> > failure have more to do with misunderstanding the dynamics within our
> > Pick programming community.
>
> [snip useful suggestions, about improving the formatting]
>
> An interesting discussion. I have to say thanks to Rex and Tony for
> their efforts at sharing their expertise in posts on PickWiki and
> speaking up for it here.
>
> Visual appeal is obviously not priority #1 on the site. It's not
> important to me, but I can see how a more modern UI would help make
> contributing and using the site easier. I've started a page (on the
> wiki of course :-) to capture any ideas that come out of this or other
> discussions. MediaWiki seems like an obvious alternative to the
> current software used.
First I'll toss in a "Thanks and good work" to you and all those
involved in getting the pickwiki to this point. There have been a lot
of starts at various gathering spots re MV and this one seems to have
had more success than most others.
Other than wikipedia that rises above the fold in many google
searches, the other wikis that work best for me are those that have a
new group forum (that you can get by email) associated with them. I
think it is a closed one, but I use the Cache' AJAX wiki (Zen)
regularly, which uses Google Groups. The searches show up both
discussion and articles. So, I would highly recommend a wiki like
google groups that has with their discussion lists. I do realize that
it is not a small thing to migrate, however, and would want the
pickwiki url to point to the new site, so maybe it is unrealistic, but
I think it would take the wiki to the next level, with several obvious
and other less obvious potential advantages for the MV community. --
dawn