Wikidweb talk:To Do List

From Wikidweb

Table of contents

1 Question on <urldesc> tag - Aerik please read 2 Explanation of <urldesc> tag 3 <urldesc> continued + internal link opens in new window 4 New window and urldesc tags, cont'd 5 That sounds good 6 Universe category structure 7 Add links questions to "To Do" list 8 Indexing proper labels within alphabetized sections 9 suggestion: catering to dialup surfers 10 Firefox (in)compatability 11 Please import ODP data 12 Italian Wikidweb 13 Subcategory under Search Engines? 14 Category listings 15 Pointless [[ wiki ]] linking of everything 16 tags 17 Replace "Article" with Links 18 Any chance of More Subdirectories?

Question on <urldesc> tag - Aerik please read

Do we have to have the <urldesc> tag? The problem I have with it is you can't have formatting or links within the "tagged" area. I just end the tag early before link or formatting, but that seems like this could be a problem for users. I have fixed a few links within the tags on user submissions. If this can't be changed (or you don't want to), I will make up another help topic for clarification of this.

I also posted at Help_talk:Add_an_entry about the need to make an internal link open in a new window. I couldn't find anything at the WikiMedia help page. Please see that.

webseo 12:41, 2 Apr 2005 (PST)

Has anyone else noticed that site descriptions are garbled? Example: NaodW29-urlname_www597095a65af5976800000001 NaodW29-urldesc36c57c84e5a36e200000001. They all seem to be like that.

CTPhil 7:27 7 Feb 2006

Nevermind, it's back :)

CTPhil 21:44 7 Feb 2006

I don't know what happened - I wish I did. I can only guess that PHP hiccupped as I wasn't making any changes. Wierd.--Aerik Sylvan 07:29, 14 Feb 2006 (MST)

Explanation of <urldesc> tag

Hi - Yeah, I know it's kind of weird. The text between those tags are handled by custom written bits of code, and do not go back through the wikitext parser. Here's my thinking, although I'd love to get your thoughts too: that the description of the site really should not have any special markup because the markup is usually having to do with emphasis, like for marketing purposes. The site descriptions should really be pretty objective, and not saying things like, "The BEST DIRECTORY on the internet" for example.

Okay, that said, it's still something of a problem and it is confusing for users. I'd also like to be able to add other functionality which would require sending the text through the parser.

By the way, the tags have two purposes - primarily they allow me a lot of control about what happens ot the content between them, but they also allow a XML style markup, which may be useful in the future. None of that changes the fact that it's confusing for users though.--Aerik Sylvan 09:31, 3 Apr 2005 (PDT)

<urldesc> continued + internal link opens in new window

OK...as long as it is confusing to you too, I can live with my current method of closing the </urldesc> tag prematurely. Hope that doesn't mess up any future XML functions. I understand your logic on the formatting of text, but the secondary links will just have to be handled as we find them.

Please respond to this question, I posted previously (couldn't figure out how to format a "quote" from a previous message - revert to the text email method):

> I also posted at Help_talk:Add_an_entry about the need to make an internal link open in a new window. I couldn't find anything at the WikiMedia help page. Please see that.

--webseo 10:17, 3 Apr 2005 (PDT)

PS. I see you had the same problem with wikicode in the title box, really messes up the post, doesn't it.

New window and urldesc tags, cont'd

Hi, Sorry about that - I think you have to make an external link to pop a new window, but I added it to the add/submit screen (it's really an external link there).

Yeah, the wikicode made a mess! How about for the urltags for now, let's have a main description with no wiki-code, then extened description that has it. What I have in mind long term is listings with extended descriptions and sub-links like this: (link blocked - not on whitelist) . Does that shed any light on things? How do you feel about what I said about exluding emphasis type markup on the description? Thanks! --Aerik Sylvan 15:46, 3 Apr 2005 (PDT)

That sounds good

I looked at the example at (link blocked - not on whitelist) and I think that's great. I understand and agree with what you are saying about the emphasis within descriptions.

Universe category structure

It may make sence to create fill out the Universe category structure to a point that suggest various topic for growth and lock it down so users must categories their links under the appropriate cats/sub-cats. I know this directory will be different, but it's possible that you would use the Other Directory Project's Top level as a starting point and then add/remove as you see fit. This site is new and so am I, so I'd rather ask before doing. --Ryan 13:38, 5 Apr 2005 (PDT)

Add links questions to "To Do" list

1. When there is time, I would like to know how to make links open in a new window. We addressed this here (http://www.wikidweb.com/wiki/Category_talk:Regional) and somewhere else (can't remember).
2. I would also like a mini lesson or help topic on how to construct internal link paths. I had to use the external link coding and path to make the link in the previous sentence.

Examples of internal linking

Indexing proper labels within alphabetized sections

Wikidweb is a beautiful idea...

I think the major problem everywhere in discussion forums on the net is that noise from noisy members occurs, unless the moderators are on top of things and are minded to make the social environment more pleasant. The same thing occurs with "open" internet directories such as dmoz.org. Dmoz becomes weighted down with low quality activist pages and esoteric things such as specific planning proposals for a certain specific community. There is no way to recategorize those entries, and clean up the central listings there, I suppose, without the free editing ability which a wiki offers.

One little mechanical problem with wikidweb, today, however, is that it is impossible for contributors to list linques with their proper labels in the alphabetical index... The URL is listed there instead. For instance, today, I sought to add a gateway to a website which offers a biography and directory of etexts of the writings of Henry David Thoreau. and the result is shown here: http://www.wikidweb.com/wiki/Category:Literature Just as an afterthought, I manually included a properly labeled linque in the editable portion of the category. Anyone who wishes should feel free to correct the wikicode there. I left things that way, today, just to make an illustration of my point, here, in this discussion. 66.118.209.110 00:22, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Hmm... Well, I see your point, and I honestly hadn't considered the impact of long urls. I had thought a little about this (since most directories list by title, not url) but my initial thinking was that the current structure was okay because it does not present the opportunity to easily manipulate the listing order (one would have to manipulate the url first). For examply, someone might list give a title of "A Henry David Thoreau page" and a person wanting to bump them from the "top" of the list for that category would title their page "Aa Hentry David Thoreau page" (not sure if that's the best example, but I think you get what I mean). I'd be happy to chat about it more... Best Regards, --Aerik Sylvan 07:08, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Why not simply design a way for people to choose a letter of the alphabet to list the thing under? For instance, I would like to title the entry "Henry David Thoreau" - in the natural language style which wikipedia uses. But, I would like to list it under T, of course - his last name. Index orders in libraries have been standardized for a long time. Any editor could come in and reseat an entry under the proper letter. I think you will have less problem with self promotion on this site, than you think, because of the nature of how a wiki invites people to true up the quality of the resource which they use, daily. Let's chat. I really would like to invest time and contribute to this directory. 66.118.209.110 08:09, 15 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Well, let's first split up the question - really it's two things: One is titling of entries in the category views (should it show up as the url or as some other title, perhaps the page title as it does in dmoz?) and two is the order. The current code in mediawiki does allow the order to be changed, but not the title (because it assumes the title is the title of the page - which, here, is the url). Are you interested in the title showing in the category, the order, or both? Thanks for your interest, --Aerik Sylvan 18:38, 17 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Well, I have many many linques to add to this database, and I'll gladly do it, but 90% of them are long urls - and I'm not one to want to make a mess of a wiki. It's not polite. I would suggest that you think about what you want for the title of the page... should it be the url? or should it be something that can be easily placed in a thematically based sequence? It's very awkward to navigate a page of alphabetical entries when they refer to urls rather than subjects. You might want to think about the organization of things, before there's too much of a mountain of material to go through and reindex. You say that the mediawiki software allows you to to create alphabetical indexes using methods other than the page title list? 66.118.209.110 11:05, 20 Jul 2005 (PDT)

You have raised some very good points - I think I am going to have to make some changes to be more accomodating to long urls. I want to point out though, that the engine can't handle dynamic pages (anything with a '?' in them) and I dont' think I need to fix that - this would usually indicate deeper links than I want to list at the top level. This may exclude some pages (users having some content on a free host, for example), but I think it will be minimal. Most people/hosts have content that fits the "normal" directory looking structure. Okay, that said, what I plan to do is to use the existing wiki framework, with a minor mod. In your category, you can put a pipe (like this --> | ) and then put the title. Currently this just changes the sort order in the category view, but I think I can (and will) change the title in the category view also. I want to be a little more sure abbout the other effects of this... but I'm pretty convinced I'll have to do something. What do you think? --Aerik Sylvan 12:51, 22 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Cool, I'll be interested to watch the evolution of this wiki 66.118.209.110 21:10, 22 Jul 2005 (PDT)

suggestion: catering to dialup surfers

I would also suggest that people be encouraged when adding a linque to say whether they feel it's good for people with dialup internet service or whether it's better for people with high speed internet.

Not many browsers tell you how big a webpage is while it's loading. However, most people will have a thought about this issue when they suggest a page for your list.

There's a reason why sites such as craigslist and google have gained so much acclaim. They are accessible to all internet surfers and give people a lot of dexterity with their work. There's a real need for collections of linques which provide navigation ability to people who are surfing with dial up - probably half of websurfers, today. Most people are stuck in gridlock. I find that an ideal size for a dialup accessible webpage is about 100kb. 300kb gets awkward and 500kb is near impossible. At top speed, a 56kilobit connection can load pages at 7 kilobytes per second. And even the best ISPs will usually run their lines at circa 5 or 6kilobytes per second. 66.118.209.110 12:23, 27 Jul 2005 (PDT)

Yes i agree, i have an GPRS connection ad my speed is 9600x4bps or lower, sites bigger than 100 KB ore not visitable with modem speed.--Sandro kensan 10:06, 28 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Firefox (in)compatability

Hi,

I would have thought since this site is all about open source, that Firefox would be supported. I was forced to open IE to get the form for submission to open after I searched. Firefox just sat there. While I haven't looked a the code, it appears something is used that Firefox doesn't like.

Just my 2 cents

Jon

Hi Jon, I think you've probably experienced a fluke - I use firefox almost exclusively, including for testing functionality, etc, and it works fine... try it again, I guess? What version FF are you using? --Aerik Sylvan 21:34, 6 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Please import ODP data

I am very excited to find this wiki. I have long thought that the Open Directory Project (ODP) (http://dmoz.org) should be made into a wiki to allow for quicker updates and more contributions. I hope that wikidweb finds success in this long-needed position. However, to get the project off the ground, I think it would be highly beneficial to import the existing links from the ODP, since they have 5,172,200 sites and an extensive (albeit imperfect) directory structure. RDF dumps are available (http://rdf.dmoz.org). Does anyone have the know-how to import the data? I am willing to help, but you'd have to put up with an eager learner rather than an seasoned RDF veteran. -James Carroll (wiki@mrspud.cjb.net)

Hi James, thanks for your contributions. I can appreciate the pont you're making, but there are some critical differences between the ODP and this project. Specifically, two things: this project uses a difference license and this project's goal is to give visibility to little known sites. Also, I think the organic growth of this project validates it. We are currently at about 1,700 listings, and it's accelerating. (BTW, I'm actually pretty good at that sort of thing, but decided early on that I don't want to do it.) --Aerik Sylvan 09:28, 9 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Italian Wikidweb

Hi Aerik, hi Webseo, I have an italian site (www.kensan.it) with page rank 5, i think Wikidweb is a very good project, i'm a Wikipedia user and contributor too.

But i'm italian and my tongue is italian then i would like an italian section (like in Wikipedia) in Wikidweb.

If you agree i like to be an editor for the italian category (Blog) and i'll insert a link to the project wikidweb in the top of my home page. I'm an editor of the linux portal linuxhelp.it with PR5, maybe the owner will insert the link of this project.

The multilingua wikidweb is important because only a small number of citizen are USA or GB.

Sorry for my english.

Oppps my sign: --Sandro kensan 08:19, 18 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Hi Sandro, I'm glad you like Wikidweb. Yes, I do have plans to add international versions (just like Wikipedia), but I don't know if we are really busy enough to do it right now... I'd be concerned that it would have few listings, not enough editors, and be a target for spam... what do you think? Let's discuss.--Aerik Sylvan 17:57, 18 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Yeah, i like the project. Few listing? Not Editor? It's an advertising matter. I think that a bit of blog support can change the few listing.

I dont know about the Spam problem. It is an important topic but I dont know.

For the italian category i can write some article in some on-line magazine. I have the password of linuxhelp.it, it is a linux portal with page rank 5, i can write an article: "Wikidweb is seeking an Editor!". It is enought?--Sandro kensan 05:47, 19 Oct 2005 (PDT)

By the way is there a wikidweb logo? I immage a logo with two open square brackets, a world image ad two close square brackets. I have created the logo, with apollo 17 earth image (credit NASA, no copyrighted image, pics from wikipedia), the logo is in my blog (www.kensan.it).--Sandro kensan 07:46, 19 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Hi Sandro - right now I'm just using the [[WWW]] logo - I check out your website at www.kensan.it, but didn't see anything like what you described...? For an Italian Wikidweb, I would implement a structure like Wikipedia, ie, it.wikidweb.com - but I'm still concerned that it would get spammed, and since I don't know any Italian, I don't know how much I could do to protect it. Tell you what, if you think you can round up enough users to keep it of good quality, I would be more than happy to set it up. Best Regards, --Aerik Sylvan 03:35, 22 Oct 2005 (PDT)

The logo is on-line in my home page (wait a moment until the page is loaded). But i have write an small article with the news "I want You" in the site linuxhelp.it and ziobudda.net. I suppose it will be read from 500 italian linux users and may be some guys will become editors.

Link: www.ziobudda.net, www.linuxhelp.it, www.kensan.it/articoli/Wikidweb.php

In the link above there are the logo that i use for Wikidweb: i like it ;)--Sandro kensan 12:16, 22 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Subcategory under Search Engines?

Recently I have spent some time researching the differences between search engines. Could we have a subcategory for search engines that use their own algorithm? There are not too many, but it is good to know that they will provide different results. Vaganyik

Hi, yes, I suppose that would be fine. Do you have a more specific suggestion in mind? Best Regards, --Aerik Sylvan 23:07, 16 Dec 2005 (PST)

Well, the sites are basically: Google, Yahoo, MSN Search, Teoma, Gigablast, Wisenut. But that is obvious. :-) To be honest I have not found a good term for this. The terminology is far from clear.

• (link blocked - not on whitelist) suggests that search engines are what I am talking about as there four categories of search tools available now: search engines, meta-search engines, directories and specialized databases.
• (link blocked - not on whitelist) says that 'Search Engine: Any service generally designed to allow users to search the web or a specialized database of information.' and as a result 'Directories: A type of search engine where listings are gathered through human efforts, rather than by automated crawling of the web.'

And so on... I call them 'original search engines', but no one else uses this term. :-) Search engines using their own algorithms to crawl the web is too long. Anyway, I thought that you should decide. If you think it isn't worth it, I will simply put all of them into the Search Engine category and include this piece of information in the description. Perhaps that will be sufficient. -- vaganyik

Hi, That sounds fine - I don't know what to calle them either. I would like to mention however, that one of the goals of this directory is to offer a place for less known sites to be found. Certainly it is good to be comprehensive, and I have no objections to adding well known sites, but what I really encourage is adding sites that are interesting and not so well known, so I would hope that you would add your favorite lesser known resources. The two pages you mention are very interesting, for example, and it's not reasonable to list every page on the internet (!!!), listing a partiular section of a large domain (like www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/FindInfo.html as a tutorial - it's not the domain, and it's not just one page) is great. Does that help? --Aerik Sylvan 11:14, 17 Dec 2005 (PST)

How about Search Engines & Directories as a category name? and just put them all under that? Or we can just coin our own phrase and call them something like Web Locators. Who knows, it might put you on the map as creating the newest term! Well, hey! You said this was the place for new ideas.--User:Lorissia 15:10, 1 Jan 2006 (EST)

Category listings

I think the category selection box when submitting a new site is very small (4 lines). It is very difficult to scroll all these categories with anything less than 10 lines. Maybe 15 is OK.

Pointless [[ wiki ]] linking of everything

Some people seem to have developed a habit of putting square brackets around all sorts of keywords and dates as though there are going to be articles on those subjects on this wiki. I presume this is pointless unless there happens to be a website devoted to that date/person etc that has a directory entry in this directory under that single keyword (extremely unlikely). Specifically on wikipedia people put brackets around dates so that they will display in whatever format is set in the viewers preferences (assuming they have an account and are logged in) - that of course doesn't apply here.
I'm in the habit of editing out such pointless links, but thought I should check if this violates the house policy :-)

Nope, edit away! House policy is still very much in the formative stage, and unless it's covered on one of the help pages, go for it! Thanks! --Aerik Sylvan 21:02, 23 Oct 2006 (MDT)

tags

Ok we have <urlname_www> and <urldesc> tags are there others? How about a <urllogo> tag for all those pages that have a company logo (or maybe have it in the <urlname_www> field).
Also as <urlname_www> and <urldesc> are rather significant to you, do you have some way of listing pages that have missed them out? --Wikikiwi 19:11, 26 Oct 2006 (MDT)

Hi - Those are some very good suggestions! Yes, we can add more tags, but there currently are not any others. BTW, we should be careful to not use any logos without permission, as they are no doubt copyrighted and deeplinking without permission (we do not allow file uploads on this wiki) is probably a copyright violation. Yes, I can run an sql query to check for missing tags, but I think there are very few pages where they are not in place (?). Thanks! --Aerik Sylvan 13:57, 1 Nov 2006 (MST)

The logo thing is just because a number of entries (like most commercial ones probably placed here by the site owner or SEO on their behalf) have include a logo link, outside the <urlname_www> and <urldesc> fields. If you made it a field that they could use then you could also control its size and placement to give a uniform directory look. As for copyright, I expect that from the wikipedia precedents, under US law it looks as though you can happily claim fair use when using it to refer to the company itself.

The missing <urlname_www> and <urldesc> thing is because I ran across a couple without and wondered if there were others. --Wikikiwi 16:41, 2 Nov 2006 (MST)

Replace "Article" with Links

Beneath Subcategory heading on each page it lists "Articles", however the wiki is primarily for posting links and then commenting on these links. I think it would be better suited if the Heading was Links since this is a new form of "link" directory.

Jori

Hi Jori - thanks for the feedback. Elsewhere in the directory I refer to them as "Listings", so I'm thinking of changing it from "Articles" to "Listings" - what do you think? Thanks, --Aerik Sylvan 22:28, 9 Nov 2006 (MST)

Any chance of More Subdirectories?

Farmers, Farms, Food Producers, Food Security, 100 Mile Diet under Health?

I believe as a result of global warming, more people will be interested in eating locally and these topics will become hot. Sharon Jackson 13:16, 2 Jan 2008 (PST)

Hi! Absolutely - you can create them yourself! Did you read Help:Categories? If you still have questions after that, let me know. --Aerik Sylvan 18:27, 2 Jan 2008 (PST)