WIKI editor issues
Just added my 1st bit to the Wiki
http://www.diyaudio.com/wiki/index.php?page=Loud+Speakers
and found some glitches in the editor. The edit window pops up on top of other stuff in the window, stays where it is when you do a preview -- making the preview sort of useless, with the edit window on top -- but goes away when i save.
Also. Do i just insert standard HTML to do formating and links & such or the boards pseudo-code.
dave
Just added my 1st bit to the Wiki
http://www.diyaudio.com/wiki/index.php?page=Loud+Speakers
and found some glitches in the editor. The edit window pops up on top of other stuff in the window, stays where it is when you do a preview -- making the preview sort of useless, with the edit window on top -- but goes away when i save.
Also. Do i just insert standard HTML to do formating and links & such or the boards pseudo-code.
dave
Use pseudo-code where possible (does it even let you use HTML?), as it provides flexibility and standardization down the track (eg implementation of css layouts / colors / styles).
I'm a big fan of neat, and it bugs me how ugly it all is 🙂 I'll sharpen up the sites CSS and link it in...
Bug? Hmm maybe try a different browser 😉 (Which one are you using?)
I'm a big fan of neat, and it bugs me how ugly it all is 🙂 I'll sharpen up the sites CSS and link it in...
Bug? Hmm maybe try a different browser 😉 (Which one are you using?)
Jason said:
I'll try a different browser, but i won't use a different one. I use iCab which is small, fast, sleek and takes maximum advantage of the Mac UI. It is a beauty. Really puts the boots to the sloths most people use. It is still in beta, and doesn't fully support XHTML yet which could be the problem.
dave
Seems the Wiki is pretty much dead. There is some very high quality stuff in there though. Interested in opinions on whether to kill it and merge the content back into the forums, and instead focus on ways to create moderated faq's or something in the forum proper.
What do you think? Gave it a go, didn't work, try something different?
What do you think? Gave it a go, didn't work, try something different?
I did have a hard time finding out what Wiki was about, and still have a bit...
I see it as a technical database with design guides and application notes???
If this is the case maybe it should have another name?
I would be happy to donate a bit info too
Sonny
I see it as a technical database with design guides and application notes???
If this is the case maybe it should have another name?
I would be happy to donate a bit info too
Sonny
Jason said:
Give it a go. Needs to be pushed. Best done by example.
If i could figure out how to create new pages i would be putting a lot more stuff up.
dave
Jason.
leave us the wiki! It take a lot of patience,
(like with the analogue board 🙂 which now is humming like a bee hive); I just plan to add a procedure how to adjust a TT tonearm.
Methinks, it takes a lot of balls to post there, and lot of mental, conceptional skills to find proper wording, text-book level.
We should encourage skilled elders to contribute.
I find th idea to have something editable by all just brilliant. And the higher the quality of the contributions already there, the less the urge to change something and the higher the concern not to make a fools of one self by changing it. Methinks, the wiki is prone to tend toward high quality, by its structure.
leave us the wiki! It take a lot of patience,
(like with the analogue board 🙂 which now is humming like a bee hive); I just plan to add a procedure how to adjust a TT tonearm.
Methinks, it takes a lot of balls to post there, and lot of mental, conceptional skills to find proper wording, text-book level.
We should encourage skilled elders to contribute.
I find th idea to have something editable by all just brilliant. And the higher the quality of the contributions already there, the less the urge to change something and the higher the concern not to make a fools of one self by changing it. Methinks, the wiki is prone to tend toward high quality, by its structure.
Suggestion for replacing the Wiki
I would rather see a situation where skilled elders or anyone feeling they have something important to contribute writes up a technical paper and it is posted and displayed in the particular section under their own name very similar to the way we start a thread at present.
EG
Someone writes a paper on loudspeakers.
It stays in the loudspeaker section.
Someone else writes a paper on loudspeakers
That also stays in the loudspeaker section.
Now we have a permanent "Technical papers" thread which when opened shows a menu which says
Dynamic braking of loudspeakers written by xxxx
Voice coil heating of loudspeakers written by yyyy
As time goes by the number of technical papers may grow to 5 10 20 etc
Now we have recorded important information and it is easily available for reading by any interested person.
Only the original author can add to his own paper. Once writen and posted papers cannot be removed without managers permission. More information and corrections can be added at any time by the original author.
The same situation applies in each section for example Video section has a number of people persuing different aspects of large screen projection such as FAQ, Macrovision copy protection, Recycling of polarized light, various light sources advantages and disadvantages, screens etc
We have such a scheme in Video already where one member wrote up a very useful FAQ. It is now permanent and the original author is the only one who can add to the FAQ.
Judging by the number of views it is very popular.
It is of course feasible that several people could write up papers on the same subject but that is not a problem because it is adding to our overall knowledge.
Hopefully this would allow over a period of time a very usefull easily accesed library of technical papers to be built up for each particular section.
I would rather see a situation where skilled elders or anyone feeling they have something important to contribute writes up a technical paper and it is posted and displayed in the particular section under their own name very similar to the way we start a thread at present.
EG
Someone writes a paper on loudspeakers.
It stays in the loudspeaker section.
Someone else writes a paper on loudspeakers
That also stays in the loudspeaker section.
Now we have a permanent "Technical papers" thread which when opened shows a menu which says
Dynamic braking of loudspeakers written by xxxx
Voice coil heating of loudspeakers written by yyyy
As time goes by the number of technical papers may grow to 5 10 20 etc
Now we have recorded important information and it is easily available for reading by any interested person.
Only the original author can add to his own paper. Once writen and posted papers cannot be removed without managers permission. More information and corrections can be added at any time by the original author.
The same situation applies in each section for example Video section has a number of people persuing different aspects of large screen projection such as FAQ, Macrovision copy protection, Recycling of polarized light, various light sources advantages and disadvantages, screens etc
We have such a scheme in Video already where one member wrote up a very useful FAQ. It is now permanent and the original author is the only one who can add to the FAQ.
Judging by the number of views it is very popular.
It is of course feasible that several people could write up papers on the same subject but that is not a problem because it is adding to our overall knowledge.
Hopefully this would allow over a period of time a very usefull easily accesed library of technical papers to be built up for each particular section.
remp said:
Right on, Remp!
I visited the wiki a few times and was puzzled about its operation and lack of activity. 😕
It would seem to me to be better to ask (beg?) some of the more experienced members to write up a quick blurb about one or more areas they have experience in than the wiki. Develop some form of outline so that there is some continuity between the "articles" and to aid in writing (I, for one, write much better technical papers when I have an outline before I begin). The only big problem in my eyes will be dragging people away from their projects to write.... seems to me I have a similar debacle - I don't want to tear myself away from my projects to write a blurb about them for our web site. 🙁
The wiki was a good idea, tho 😎
Mark Broker
If i am going to take the time to write an article, i'll probably put it up on my own website. The Wiki should encorage people to take good content out of the posts and put it into the Wiki.
I have done one bit, but got stymied on more because i haven't been able to quickly figure out how to create new pages.
dave
I have done one bit, but got stymied on more because i haven't been able to quickly figure out how to create new pages.
dave
Planet10
Not everyone has a website
It is difficult to include pictures which can be the difference between understanding or not understanding a complex point
You yourself say you got stymied on more than one occasion because you could not quickly figure out how to create new pages.
The Wiki should encourage people to take good content out of the posts and put it into the Wiki.
Agreed, it should do but it does not. Good information gets buried in the posts and becomes difficult to find.
Not everyone has a website
It is difficult to include pictures which can be the difference between understanding or not understanding a complex point
You yourself say you got stymied on more than one occasion because you could not quickly figure out how to create new pages.
The Wiki should encourage people to take good content out of the posts and put it into the Wiki.
Agreed, it should do but it does not. Good information gets buried in the posts and becomes difficult to find.
write a mod perhaps for the forums which allows the use of wiki links in posts so i can go
"...or you could use an ((Electrostatic Loudspeaker|ESL)) for that amplifier..." etc
or perhaps even integrate wiki searchig into vBulletin 🙂
i hate hunting through hundrds of posts to find one specific answer
i just got a copy of vBulletin myself so perhaps if you are interested I could look into it? would be good, and would promote using the WIki as a reference more often.
Also I added TUBE AMPLIFIER and SOURCES & ELECTRONICS which links to the link page already there. I didn't see the notice about obtaining permission from the thread first sorry, so I hope you don't mind those two additions, otherwise, in the spirit of Wiki, edit it 🙂
Also I should seek permission on this one, but the main page shoudl be re-ordered and made a bit more categorical like the forums. So on the main page, Amplifiers, then inside that Pass, Tubes & SS. Same for everythign else. Helps searching and keeps the main page uncluttered as it expands.
"...or you could use an ((Electrostatic Loudspeaker|ESL)) for that amplifier..." etc
or perhaps even integrate wiki searchig into vBulletin 🙂
i hate hunting through hundrds of posts to find one specific answer
i just got a copy of vBulletin myself so perhaps if you are interested I could look into it? would be good, and would promote using the WIki as a reference more often.
Also I added TUBE AMPLIFIER and SOURCES & ELECTRONICS which links to the link page already there. I didn't see the notice about obtaining permission from the thread first sorry, so I hope you don't mind those two additions, otherwise, in the spirit of Wiki, edit it 🙂
Also I should seek permission on this one, but the main page shoudl be re-ordered and made a bit more categorical like the forums. So on the main page, Amplifiers, then inside that Pass, Tubes & SS. Same for everythign else. Helps searching and keeps the main page uncluttered as it expands.
Anyone read this forum?
I propose some changes to the main site and am after some feedback.
I think firstly the wiki should be split into categories so the main page will contain Amplifiers, Sources, Loudspeakers, Video, etc
which then links to another page which has a definition of each
then more links to sub categories such as Tube Amplifiers, Solid State, Pass Labs and for speakers, Planar, Plasma etc
Then those pages contain a definition and information etc
that way each page will be in some kind of standard format making it easier to follow and also easier to narrow down your search for information, otherwise over time I can see the format becoming too cluttered and too confusing to follow.
Feedback on proposed changes please
-Mike
I propose some changes to the main site and am after some feedback.
I think firstly the wiki should be split into categories so the main page will contain Amplifiers, Sources, Loudspeakers, Video, etc
which then links to another page which has a definition of each
then more links to sub categories such as Tube Amplifiers, Solid State, Pass Labs and for speakers, Planar, Plasma etc
Then those pages contain a definition and information etc
that way each page will be in some kind of standard format making it easier to follow and also easier to narrow down your search for information, otherwise over time I can see the format becoming too cluttered and too confusing to follow.
Feedback on proposed changes please
-Mike
Sounds good, go nuts.
<i>I didn't see the notice about obtaining permission from the thread first sorry, so I hope you don't mind those two additions, otherwise, in the spirit of Wiki, edit it </i>
Please remove this too, lets see what happens. Whoever is most energized will win 🙂
<i>I didn't see the notice about obtaining permission from the thread first sorry, so I hope you don't mind those two additions, otherwise, in the spirit of Wiki, edit it </i>
Please remove this too, lets see what happens. Whoever is most energized will win 🙂
re-enable wiki images?
Jason,
I know it will mess up that one page (can't remember which one any more) but I think it would be really nice to have images reenabled in the wiki so that they appear inline with the text rather than as just a link. I know my page is starting to look really dull with nothing but all that text! I think it would be a significant enhancement to have this feature turned back on for future authors...
Please? 😉
Jason,
I know it will mess up that one page (can't remember which one any more) but I think it would be really nice to have images reenabled in the wiki so that they appear inline with the text rather than as just a link. I know my page is starting to look really dull with nothing but all that text! I think it would be a significant enhancement to have this feature turned back on for future authors...
Please? 😉
HiFi - I know, it's a disgrace to your beautiful page!
I disabled the graphics functions because of the number of graphics in the video wiki page. I did it by commenting out the line below...
ahm... can't think of any easy way round this other than fixing all the video wiki images (turning them to links instead of images)... but it's late and i'm not thinking too good right now... so maybe tomorrow.
I disabled the graphics functions because of the number of graphics in the video wiki page. I did it by commenting out the line below...
Code:
function html_url($url, $text)
{
if($url == $text
&& preg_match('/(.jpe?g|.png|.gif|.bmp)$/i', $text))
{
//return "<img src=\"$url\" alt=\"" . basename($url) . "\" />";
}
return "<a href=\"$url\">$text</a>";
}ahm... can't think of any easy way round this other than fixing all the video wiki images (turning them to links instead of images)... but it's late and i'm not thinking too good right now... so maybe tomorrow.
navigation?
Hi, I happened across the solid state Wiki while reading through the solid state amp forum, and I thought the wiki was basically empty as a result. so one thing that somehow needs to be done is a better indication as to where you are in the grand scheme of things, as well as more indication that there are other areas that may have pertinent info..
so because i could not come up with a good solution for the above problem at this moment in time, i put a couple extra notes in a few pages for instance added the amplifier classes link to the solid state wiki page 'faq' section. and added a link (i know, should go in links) to a better description of the amp classes. I think in this case, rather than placing the link on the links page, the better solution would be to copy the original page and post it here. since copyright issues are not too clear i figured that would be a bad idea hence the link.
one thing id like to see added would be info on subcircuits and maybe even pcb layout ideas. i know pcb layouts are rarely if ever posted on the web, presumably for intellectual property rights reasons, but since we are already making contributions based on a no-right concept, couldnt we post pcb snippets if they were demonstratably our own original works? assuming we did not want any rights over what happens to it of course.
the reasoning for the pcb bit is.. i cant for the life of me figure out a good way to use TO-3 packaged transistors in a circuit design, if i want to heat sink it to something more substantial than a folded piece of aluminum between the transistor and the pcb.
thats all, let me know if you have any info or questions, i might not remember to check this board so if you reply to something relevant to my comments please email me to let me know
thanks
NICK
Hi, I happened across the solid state Wiki while reading through the solid state amp forum, and I thought the wiki was basically empty as a result. so one thing that somehow needs to be done is a better indication as to where you are in the grand scheme of things, as well as more indication that there are other areas that may have pertinent info..
so because i could not come up with a good solution for the above problem at this moment in time, i put a couple extra notes in a few pages for instance added the amplifier classes link to the solid state wiki page 'faq' section. and added a link (i know, should go in links) to a better description of the amp classes. I think in this case, rather than placing the link on the links page, the better solution would be to copy the original page and post it here. since copyright issues are not too clear i figured that would be a bad idea hence the link.
one thing id like to see added would be info on subcircuits and maybe even pcb layout ideas. i know pcb layouts are rarely if ever posted on the web, presumably for intellectual property rights reasons, but since we are already making contributions based on a no-right concept, couldnt we post pcb snippets if they were demonstratably our own original works? assuming we did not want any rights over what happens to it of course.
the reasoning for the pcb bit is.. i cant for the life of me figure out a good way to use TO-3 packaged transistors in a circuit design, if i want to heat sink it to something more substantial than a folded piece of aluminum between the transistor and the pcb.
thats all, let me know if you have any info or questions, i might not remember to check this board so if you reply to something relevant to my comments please email me to let me know
thanks
NICK
Glossary
I couldn't seem to find any general glossary of terms or similar on the Wiki.
I'd by happy to contribute some definitions; is there a good place to put it? It probably ought to be linked from the top level somewhere, as it's not going to be specific to one topic.
Cheers
IH
I couldn't seem to find any general glossary of terms or similar on the Wiki.
I'd by happy to contribute some definitions; is there a good place to put it? It probably ought to be linked from the top level somewhere, as it's not going to be specific to one topic.
Cheers
IH
[B]Please restore your Wiki pages[/B]
I went to look for changes to the Aleph-X Wiki and found everything deleted and replaced by a porn link.
I restored the previous version, but noticed that all the different Wiki pages got the same treatment from the jokester. So, to all interested parties please restore your contributions.
I went to look for changes to the Aleph-X Wiki and found everything deleted and replaced by a porn link.
I restored the previous version, but noticed that all the different Wiki pages got the same treatment from the jokester. So, to all interested parties please restore your contributions.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.