_______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikive...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l
Regards,
David McQuillan
Programme Coordinator, Diploma of Massage Therapy
Chairperson Massage Educator's Group
Lower South Island Representative, Massage New Zealand
ph - ext 8378
DDI - 479-3618
>>> Brent <pumic...@gmail.com> 03/21/08 8:24 AM >>>
brent.
> > approach is to really look at the syntax involved -- for the *most part*we're talking about approximately 6 things a new user has to learn to do 90%
It may be useful to note that recent versions of OpenOffice export in
MediaWiki format markup. It isn't perfect, but quite usable.
(And there are efforts underway to make MediaWiki export in OpenOffice
format, so someday it could be a round trip process.)
It may be useful to note that recent versions of OpenOffice export in MediaWiki format markup. It isn't perfect, but quite usable. (And there are efforts underway to make MediaWiki export in OpenOffice format, so someday it could be a round trip process.) .
Yes, there is a difference between authoring and editing. Once the
round-trip is possible, I think "editing" will be more practical. I
also think that once you have the basic structure, editing a bit here
and there in wiki format is not as off-putting. You've got lots of
examples at hand.
And it can be done without constant connectivity.
(Gee, average teachers don't seem familiar with much in this domain. :-)
> this is possibly where moodle will win out in situations where a MW install
> or WV/WE could have been used
I don't quite follow this. The typical Moodle's htmlArea seems more
frustrating than learning a bit of wiki markup. I guess there are
different frustration thresholds.
And now that there are baby steps in exporting WE content in content
package form, you can gain the benefit of collaborative editing but
still allow deployment in legacy LMSes.
this is possibly where moodle will win out in situations where a MW install or WV/WE could have been usedI don't quite follow this. The typical Moodle's htmlArea seems more frustrating than learning a bit of wiki markup. I guess there are different frustration thresholds.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" group.
To post to this group, send email to wikied...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
fyi - i noted that open office folk seem to be interested in trialling the fckeditor:
http://website.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=dev&msgNo=9641
Leigh Blackall wrote:in summary, I agree :)
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 12:15 PM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com> wrote:
In summary, IMHO, something like this would significantly enhance the usability of MW projects:
(from Confluence)
--
--
Leigh Blackall
+64(0)21736539
skype - leigh_blackall
SL - Leroy Goalpost
http://learnonline.wordpress.com
--
Email: ja...@wilderdom.com
Web: http://wilderdom.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/jtneill
Wiki/blog: http://ucspace.canberra.edu.au/x/fIAeAg
Bookmarks: http://del.icio.us/jtneill
.
i tell a lie - try it out
http://mediawiki.fckeditor.net/index.php/Sandbox
is this extension being considered?
if i'm going to try selling WV or WE to my colleagues, i think i'd need WYSIWIG editing
James Neill wrote:sounds like a MW WYSIWIG editor is still a pretty long way off:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WYSIWYG_editor
i am surprised the WM foundation doesn't seem to be pursuing this more aggressively - it seems to me the single code innovation which could have the greatest impact in terms of encouraging grass-roots engagement with the various wikis
_______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikive...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l
--
Email: ja...@wilderdom.com
Web: http://wilderdom.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/jtneill
Wiki/blog: http://ucspace.canberra.edu.au/x/fIAeAg
Bookmarks: http://del.icio.us/jtneill
Have you had a look at the SimpleTable extension:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SimpleTable
that is installed on WE?
If should eliminate most of the MW markup for tables in the "entry"
phase you mentioned.
Additionally, there are a couple of templates that can be used for
quickly creating "blank" tables for handouts
Template:AnswerBox
Template:AnswerBoxRows
Some information on templates can be found at:
Wikieducator_tutorial/Pedagogical_Templates/Template_syntax
Hope this helps.
Cheers
Rob
--
Robert Kruhlak
Burnaby, BC
CANADA
(M) +1 778 230 1875
(E) kru...@gmail.com
You say "I still just don't get this whole argument..."
The argument that I and others have made is that it's in the best interest of WikiEducator & all wikis really to reduce and eliminate where possible any barriers to participation. Any barrier will act to reduce participation. Don't we want as many people as possible involved in wiki media development?
I don't think that taking the attitude of "if you can't be bothered spending [the time needed], then I guess you just miss half of the revolution -- sorry" is particularly constructive. Wikis are not the revolution. They're only one of the open-content platforms that are out there. If they don't meet the evolving needs of consumers, then they will fall by the wayside.
D
>>> Brent <pumic...@gmail.com> 03/21/08 8:10 PM >>>
its not a bad idea ... Alexander Hayes and I tried this once though and it
was harder than it seemed to locate icons for half of the wiki things that
were there, but it would be worth another shot. Perhaps a good graphic
designer and a bit of feedback from the community could make a page on the
wiki for experimentation. It's pretty easy to swap them in and out if you
have access so we could set up a test wiki somewhere and give it a go.
I still just don't get this whole argument and it often makes me just think,
well ... if you can't be bothered spending all of about 3 hours to get a
grip on the basic basic basic (did I emphasize how basic this is?) syntax,
then I guess you just miss half of the revolution -- sorry. You can just be
a consumer. You want to be on the bus then take the pill mate, otherwise ...
get out of the way.
brent.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Leigh Blackall <leighb...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The WYSIWYG that is already in all MediaWikis just needs a little
> tweaking. The icons it uses are way weird! Is there any way we can get in
> there and change the icons so that they are more in tune with the majority
> of other WYSIWYG? And then, when we click the WYSIWYG icons, how about the
> syntax that is placed be just a little more helpful.. such as when making a
> link, we highlight the text and then click the weird link icon. It adds []
> around the word. What it needs is some red text that says: *add your link
> here*. in red so we can't miss it. I reckon that would be a good
> compromise, where drained newbies can avoid pure editing, but by using the
> icons they gradually come to appreciate and learn straight syntax.
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jim Tittsler <jtit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 1:33 PM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com>
> > wrote:
> > > i've found that the OO Writer MW export works nicely for converting
> > > existing documents into markup - but its not much good for live
> > editing, nor
> > > is OO it something that your average teacher is familiar with
> >
> > Yes, there is a difference between authoring and editing. Once the
> > round-trip is possible, I think "editing" will be more practical. I
> > also think that once you have the basic structure, editing a bit here
> > and there in wiki format is not as off-putting. You've got lots of
> > examples at hand.
> >
> > And it can be done without constant connectivity.
> >
> > (Gee, average teachers don't seem familiar with much in this domain. :-)
> >
> > > this is possibly where moodle will win out in situations where a MW
> > install
> > > or WV/WE could have been used
> >
> > I don't quite follow this. The typical Moodle's htmlArea seems more
> > frustrating than learning a bit of wiki markup. I guess there are
> > different frustration thresholds.
> >
> > And now that there are baby steps in exporting WE content in content
> > package form, you can gain the benefit of collaborative editing but
> > still allow deployment in legacy LMSes.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> --
> Leigh Blackall
> +64(0)21736539
> skype - leigh_blackall
> SL - Leroy Goalpost
> http://learnonline.wordpress.com
>
> >
>
Don't we want as many people as possible involved in wiki media development?