Translation(s): none
- Please don't update this page. It's only a snapshot of discussion historics.
See ["DebianWiki/ConventionsDiscussion"]
?TableOfContents(2)
?Anchor(image)
Images
What is the concept of the image database (["Portal/IDB"])? Are these images to be used in every NewPage or just in the portals? ?BRI ask this question because I just modified Portail_Accueil to correct the problem with the images used.?BR And then I checked all the new material about this wiki organisation: DebianWiki, DebianWiki/EditorGuide (great work! this wiki really needs this type of organisation) and found the ["Portal/IDB"]... so:
- was my initial modification incorrect? was the fact that image links were bad ok?
-- EricVeirasGalisson ?DateTime(2007-11-12T21:05:58Z)
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-12T23:22:39Z)
Hi EricVeirasGalisson and thank you for your corrections. Yes Portal/IDB is a central workspace for portal only. It's useful to maintain translated portal versions. Concerning articles, perhaps, we may define to store image (logo and icones only) in the referent article (english version) ? Screenshot are using translated interfaces, so we can't centralize them. Bye.
-- -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-11-13T00:17:34Z)
Hi, IMHO, Images that belongs to DebianWiki's theme should be served as static content (i.e from http://wiki.debian.org/htdocs/''common''/img/ ). -> for performance and to make sure they are rad-only. (once we will have a stable list we'll submit to Erinn... we can still wait a few months.). Other image should be attached the the page, since I guess that if an image is reused, the text next to it is probably duplicated too.
Ok, so for the portal page ["Portail_Accueil"] (note: this non-CamelCase pagename is not easy to use...), I'll remodify the links to use the images from Portal/IDB.
-- EricVeirasGalisson ?DateTime(2007-11-13T10:14:27Z) (I prefer to put my signature after my comment, you seems to prefer before, any reason why?)
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-13T15:50:49Z)
EricVeirasGalisson: ["Portail_Accueil"] will be renamed ["PageD'Accueil/Testing"]. If you want, you can begin to sync this portal with english version ["FrontPage/Testing"]. Don't sync sub-portals because it's not stabilized. About your signature, don't worry, it's not a probleme. personnaly I prefer to know who before what. Thanks for your contribution.
FranklinPiat: Yes it's a good idea to do it when definitive release will be published. Maybe we can contact ErinnClark to introduce this proposition ? (I notify him) Bye.
SalokineTerata: what do you mean by syncing ["Portail_Accueil"] and ["FrontPage/Testing"] (now ?FrontPage/PortalProposal):
- the French page must be changed to conform to the English one?
- Yes. French layout is very very out of date
the text from JoeyHess in the comment section of the English page need translation?
- Yes,I think
- the English version format is outdated and need to be made like the French one to conform to what seems the new style for Portal pages?
- English version is the referent format. Just tell me and i will try to find some time to do the job.
-- EricVeirasGalisson ?DateTime(2007-11-24T17:13:08Z)
- English version is the referent format. Just tell me and i will try to find some time to do the job.
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-24T18:31:23Z)
- Hi, My answer in your text. If you want to help us, we can work together to define more task on ["DebianWiki/Administration"]
Bye
- I've synced the two pages:
- A relecture of my traduction (especially the comment part) may be necesary.
a French ?DefaultInclude version is needed, what is the prefered name: ?FrDefaultInclude?
This page (?ConventionsDiscussion) is normally dedicated to Conventions discussion, so where is better to talk to organise the job (maybe DebianWiki/Administration/Discussion ?)
bye -- EricVeirasGalisson ?DateTime(2007-11-25T17:42:08Z)
- I've synced the two pages:
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-25T18:13:10Z)
- Yes very good job.
At this moment, name of translated pages is analysis in progress (see ["DebianWiki/TranslationNamespace"]). Read this and give your opinion.
Yes ["DebianWiki/Administration"] is a good place to coordonate our works (especially Current tasks section) Bye.
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-24T11:32:09Z)
Insert DebianWiki's theme should be served as static content to [:DebianWiki/Administration#todo:Administration task]
Homepage
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-11T22:06:51Z)
- Why not ? (homepage other other than Debian official stuff)
inline:Portal/IDB/logo-gohome-32x32.png |
http://... - Homepage |
-- -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-11-13T00:17:34Z)
- We should carefully choose what is highlighted. To many highlighted stuffs are just confusing.
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-13T15:50:49Z)
Yes too informations kill information
Look at ["Synaptic"] to illustrate my proposition. Synaptic it's not an official Debian projet, but, I think it's easy for user to find official hompepage about it.
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-11-24T11:32:09Z)
Homepage is presented in the External Links or See also sections of the page.
Footer, category and portal
- Hi Salokine,
I have noticed you create a lot of links at the bottom of pages. Wouldn't it be better to use 1) CategoryXXXX or 2) a link in "See Also" section ?
FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-12-12T21:35:32Z)
Hi, Consider Portal as Category so I flag page with it (as parent page). Maybe we can create virtual Category pointing to each portal.(See also is for "connexe" information. )
Example: ?CategorySofware contain a #redirect to "Software"
Next, we can flag page with ?CategorySofware and not directly with "Software"
Bye. -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-12-12T22:10:38Z)
- Salokine, This seems a good solution.
FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-12-13T12:07:15Z)
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-12-13T21:04:21Z)
- Each Portal have its Category alias.
Example: Software have CategorySoftware
- These Categories are just a redirection to corresponding Portals
Example: CategorySoftware contain #reditect Software
- In Article, you can insert reference to portals using Category
Breadcrumbs
-- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-11-23T09:09:56Z) : The new Moinmoin engine DebianWiki is now running create breadcrumbs automatically at the top of the pages.
I assume we should remove them from the page content.
=== Policy suggestion #1 ==== If a page belong to a collection, but isn't a ?/SubPage of it's parent :
- consider renaming the page as a subpage (if it really belongs to it).
- add a link the "parent" page in the see also (if it doesn't only belongs to it).
?Anchor(discussionspages)
URL for Discussion page convention
Same as above: there is a lack of consistency. Some discussion pages like this one are named using the camel case (?DebianWikiConventionsDiscussion). Other pages use a slash (.../Discussion), like ["FrontPage/Discussion"]. Which standard to use? -- AugustinMa ?DateTime(2007-10-08T10:01:05Z)
Something lile [:/Discussion:Discussion] is easy to use with templates or when you copy and paste contents. Relative path are more flexible. I recommend to integrate this link in the default banner to invite readers for discussion.
Example:
[:/Discussion:Discussion]
1. Since it's very sensitive to edit a user's comment(s) in a Discussion (["ReFactor"]), we don't want to have lots of unneeded ones. 2.We don't want to turn wiki.d.o into a mailing list ;) 3. Including Discussion at the top right of the page requires to use table for the header, which make it complex (less easy to read). -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-14T23:49:02Z)
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z)
- Each banner include a discussion link like:
[:/Discussion:Discussion]
(!) [:/Discussion:Discussion]
Policy suggestion #2
proposition #2 withdrawn. see Policy 3
Policy suggestion #3
- Each banner could include a discussion link like:
[:/Discussion:Discussion]
(!) [:/Discussion:Discussion]
- This Discussion link is optionnal. Use it only when needed.
See DefaultTemplate if necessary
?Anchor(banner)
Banner
Articles don't have real imposition in their forms. Just some informations are strongly recommended.
A knowledge level indicator (see section Knowledge level indicator of article)
A path named Fil d'Arianne: The path broswed to come on current article. ["FrontPage"] > Portal Welcome ?BR ["FrontPage"] > ["Portal_Welcome"] > A Page ?BR ["FrontPage"] > [:Portal_Welcome:...] > ["A_Page"] > Discussion
note: In this example, the name of pages will be:
"FrontPage" "Portal Welcome" "A_Page" "A_Page/Discussion"
- A link to Discussion. Just the link, the page will be created if needed.
If this page have some translations, you must indicate them, it's very important. You can, if you are capable, synchronize your version. English version is the swivel page. If someone do an update in a translated page, he must synchronizes it with english version or to notify this update in the english discussion page.
I don't really like ".." because i dont't where i would end up if i click it. I assume that if the lines because too long, it's because the path from the top is too long. -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-10T23:53:24Z)
Supplementary recommendations about portals
Portal ["Portal_Introduction"] play a part of template. Use it to create a new portal easily.
Besides preceding recommendations, portal pages must be named like:Portal + _ + Title of portal.
Example, the french portal talking about hardware is named Portail_Materiel
Example, the english portal related to softwares is named Portal_Software
They must contain:
- The same banner like using on ["Portal_Introduction"]
- A short portal description starting an icon which is symbolized it. This icon must be relevant and to assert perfectly the portal.
- A list of links pointing to articles or sub-portals.
- All portals must be attached like a tree.
Supplementary recommendations about articles
Try to write your article in accessible language for user the less expert. In article tagged Beginner level, this recommendation in obligatory.
Try to give two method: a GUI version for User level and a CLI version for Advanced User level.
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z)
- Portals banners includes:
Path like: [:FrontPage:Frontpage] > [:Portal_AThing:A thing] > Current Portal
- Indicate translation links
- Insert Discussion link
Refer to PortalTemplate to respect the way
- Article banner includes:
- Try to attach your page to a portal page
Path like: [:FrontPage:Frontpage] > [:Portal_AThing:A thing] > Current Page or, if page is not attached to a portal, [:IndexPage:Index page] > Current page . in this case, Index must be attached to a portal
Indicate translation links (very important to search if exist!)
- Insert Discussion link
Refer to DefaultTemplate to respect the way
Footer
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:44:25Z)
- Footer is optinal
- Insert Categories
- Insert a section like "See also" for transversal links.
- Insert tags
Refer to DefaultTemplate to respect the way
Warning
If you find redundant articles, please, insert this flag at the top of the page:
Redundant : This article contain redundant information.?BR Please, merge it with ["Name_of_the_other_article"]. |
I Think it isn't important for the visitor, when he/she starts reading the page, to known that the page duplicates the content of another one. So we don't need to put a big colored warning : We could put a simple link at the bottom of the page, so if a user actually don't find the answer, he/she can carry-on on another page. -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-10T23:53:24Z)
- Ready to paste:
{{{||<tablestyle="width:65%;margin-left:35%;padding-left:30pt" style="border:1pt solid #b48;border-left:5pt solid #d4a">Redundant : This article contain redundant information.?BR Please, merge it with ["Name_of_the_other_article"].|| }}}
If you find an article without enough information, please, insert this flag at the top of the page:
Not enough content : This article have not enough content.?BR Please, improve it or merge it in an article having the same goal. |
I Think it isn't very important for the visitor, when he/she starts reading the page, is incomplete. it's still a good idea warn him/her. we could simply use /i\ This article have not enough content.... AND tag the page with FixMe -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-10T23:53:24Z)
- Ready to paste:
{{{||<tablestyle="width:65%;margin-left:35%;padding-left:30pt" style="border:1pt solid #b48;border-left:5pt solid #d4a">Not enough content : This article have not enough content.?BR Please, improve it or merge it in an article having the same goal.|| }}}
Portals are good tools to identify redundant articles. If you find its, finish link with this simley X-(
- Example:
[:DebianIntroduction:Introduction of Debian], [:Debian Introduction:Another introduction of Debian]
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-10T21:57:29Z)
- Another idea of a Warning:
OBSOLETE |
This page is obsolete. see ["InstallationHOWTO"] ; ?InstallationHelp ; ?InstallDebian ; MiscInstallTips |
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-12T22:49:03Z)
regarding the page redirection : see [:?DebianWiki/WikiPage#rename:DebianWiki/WikiPage#rename] (-- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-16T20:16:46Z))
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-15T21:23:02Z) (restart 10 days remaining) When you merge a page, sometimes, it's right to keep dead page and convert it as a redirection #redirect MergingPage
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-14T21:43:07Z) Once resolution validate, it move to ["DebianWiki/EditorGuide"]. We can resume Policy creation process by: Discussion speak about a policy, move it to ?DebianWikiConventionsDiscussion Discussion is stable ? try to suggest a resolution Resolution is stable since 10 days, move it to ["DebianWiki/EditorGuide"] and move old discussion to "Old discussions" below (if not, return to point 3.)
?Anchor(portal-reader-level) The User: Someone using only graphic tools. All computing words must be explain for example with a Wikimedia link. Abbreviations are explained too. So, an article characterized User level is basically based on GUI tools Advanced user: Someone who understand effectiveness of a ?Anchor(pages-names)
We should come up with a semi-official convention for page naming. Apparently there are a handful of contributors who have a long term view of what the wiki should look like, but each seems to be working in his/her corner. The result is kind of a mess. Some page are named using the camel case, like this one (?DebianWikiConventionsDiscussion). Others use an underscore like all the links in this page: ["Portal_Welcome"]. Some page are only a single word, like ["About"]. We should come up with a convention. What is the advantage of using one rather than the other? -- AugustinMa ?DateTime(2007-10-08T10:01:05Z) I think comprehensible page naming is very important. Readers appreciate clear name. So I prefer break up sentences and contract them. I recommended to get a user-friendly apporach. It's necessary to have short name, not a big sentence. Underscore must be used than white space. White spaces are not recommended in the URL.?BR Example of Page naming for "How to configure ATI driver to active 3D support": Example #1: HowToATI3D Exemple #2 (I think more comprehensive): ["Howto_ATI_3D"] Counter-example: ["How to configure ATI driver to active 3D support"] For link, I recommend some thing like: [:Howto_ATI_3D:How to configure ATI driver to active 3D support]?BR -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-10T21:57:29Z) Regarding page naming, we have to take in consideration that we use moinmoin. We shouldn't use columns (:) because this would break [:page:name: title]. Like many user who have used mediawiki, i used to prefer space or underscores in page name. however, it isn't how moinmoin expect to work, so I switch to the wiki.debian.org de-facto standard i.e use WikiName. -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-10T23:53:24Z) -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-15T21:23:02Z) }}}
This wiki is based on MoinMoin, which makes it easy to use CamelCase to create links and new pages. However, the page ["Portal_Welcome/Discussion"] suggests we use words separated by underscores (like_this instead of ?LikeThis). I don't particularly like ?CamelCasedTitles but it is easier to use them and people will use them regardless of what we decide. This is an important decision to make before we go too far in organizing the wiki. Your comments are welcome here. -- AugustinMa ?DateTime(2007-10-09T04:47:10Z) As you, Currently, out of 5000 pages, 200 pages contains an underscore, 3800 are ?CamelCased. In order to remain consistent, we probably want to stick to moinmoin's (ugly) convention. -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-14T23:49:02Z) Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) - Monday 22 October 2007 05:59:55
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z) Can using CamelCase Don't use these characters:columns : , semicolon ; , space " " , backslash \ , accents é à ö ñ ..., apostrophe '
-- very similar -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-14T23:49:02Z) Should using CamelCase First letter of first word should be upper. (["debconf"] + ["DebConf"])
#Merge the Felipe Augusto van de Wiel's comments -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-23T21:24:17Z) Use only CamelCase First letter of first word should be upper. (["debconf"] + ["DebConf"])
?Anchor(portals-names) For Portals, it's different. It must differentiate than articles. I prefer a strict convention clear and condensed with underscore or ":".?BR Example of Portal naming for "Portal of how to install and configure your Webcam": Example #1: ["Portal_Webcam"] Example #2 (why not [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:List_of_portals like Wikipedia] ? Counter-example #1: PortalWebcam Counter-example #2: PortalHowToWebcam Counter-example #3: Portal_HowTo_Webcam For link, I recommend some thing like: [:Portal_Webcam:Webcams] -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-15T21:23:02Z) What do you think if we use only CamelCase with "Portal" prefixe ? In your example, You show me an issue in my suggest. Take this french example: Portail_Wiki. In english: ?PortalWiki In german:?PortalWikiGerman In french: ?PortalWikiFrench What do you think about this ? -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-16T21:27:49Z) If you don't want to use a prefix, another idea, We can use a category like CategoryPortal or ?CategoryIndex ? Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) - Monday 22 October 2007 05:59:55
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z) Translated portal have a translated title Portal_Hardware / Portail_Materiel When translated page is modified, synchronize english version
Using separated words with underscore or CamelCase... (conform with regular page naming policy, yet to be choosen). Translated portal page name conform with regular page name policy (Portal_Hardware / Portail_HardwareFrench
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-16T21:17:28Z) Using separated words with underscore or CamelCase... (conform with regular page naming policy, yet to be choosen). Translated portal page name conform with regular page name policy (HardwareSupport / HardwareSupportFrench )
#Merge with Felipe Augusto van de Wiel's comments -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-23T21:24:17Z) Using only CamelCase (conform with regular page naming policy, yet to be choosen). Translated portal page name conform with regular page name policy (HardwareSupport / HardwareSupportFrench )
?Anchor(portal-content)
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-21T00:26:56Z) Each portals could be have a section called "Pages want to be attach" or "TODO: page in coming" with an [[Include(CategoryOfPortal)]]?
?Anchor(portal-structure) -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-15T21:23:02Z) [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki/fr mediawiki] sections are very clear [http://docs.fedoraproject.org/ fedora] only 3 sections, but in the same direction that I propose [http://wiki.mandriva.com/fr/Accueil Mandriva] look at the bottom of the page. Very good approach like I want to explain ! (only 3 sections, but in the same direction too) [http://wiki.netbsd.se/Main_Page NetBSD] another approach not exactly in the same idea, but simple and effective. [http://susewiki.org/index.php?title=Main_Page Suse] not clear, too long page [http://www.mepis.org/docs/en/index.php/Main_Page Mepis] not very bad, but too simple and section delimitation are confused [http://doc.ubuntu-fr.org/ ubuntu (FR)] very too long [http://slackwiki.org/Main_Page Slackware] no comment ... [http://gentoo-wiki.com/Main_Page gentoo] too complex index, but good. Just for the fun: look the banner navigator on [http://www.apple.com/mac/ Apple site]. I like this ! IMHO, I am quite happy with the categories on the FrontPage (using debian + developping debian + news). A Debian Quick-Start section would be on my wishlist (Beginner might be misleading). -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-16T22:07:53Z) Felipe Augusto van de Wiel - Monday 22 October 2007 05:59:55 I like the ?PortalProposal but I think it has a better chance to get adopted if you really map the current FrontPage to the Proposal, or is it your intention to drop all the links? -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-23T21:24:17Z) Yes, the goal is to keep all existing links on current FrontPage. These links will are move in the appropriate portal.
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-19T22:32:13Z) I try to propose portal map, don't hesitate to modify it: ?ThinClient
?Anchor(level) All articles attached to a portal must indicate its knowledge level at its top. Normally, You have just to take the same level of attached portal. This indicator is symbolized by star items: Ready to paste: As suggesting Franklin, articles can't be always classified in this point of view. To go in his way, I recommend to use these indicators only for Portals pages. Each parts of portals must be guide the readers. By example, Portal_Shells is classified Maybe we can rename this four levels as Franklin Comment regarding Felipe Augusto van de Wiel - Monday 22 October 2007 05:59:55 For knowledge indicator, just drop the "non star" version, use only three levels with at least one star. ?Anchor(links)
A portal contain only links ... and just that. It's like a switching system. Links must be written and translated without to show wiki syntax. Example: [:ThisIsCorrectLink:This is a good link for an example] Counterexample: ?ThisIsCorrectLink - This is not a good presentation of this link. If your link point to article written in other language that your native language, indicate it at the end of the link. Example: [:DebFrWifi:Installation and configuration of Wifi card] alternative : Example: [fr] [:DebFrWifi:Installation and configuration of Wifi card] An helpful description, understandable and concise. Exemple: Not -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-15T21:23:02Z) What to you mean ? (-- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-16T20:16:46Z)) -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-16T22:07:53Z) You have removed
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z) Links are composed like: [:TitlePage:Understandable and concise description] Not native language links finish with destination language: ''(in french)'' or ''(en anglais)''
Proposal withdrawn (#1 and #2 are now merged in #3)
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-25T20:47:28Z) If a link is within a paragraph, it can be reformated [:PageName:page name] (i.e lower cased, space separated, and shorten if the context is clear). A link that is not in a pagraph (list of "see also"...), then it should be left intact ["PageName"]. Links pointing to another language finish with ''(in language)'' [:FR/QuequeChose:SomethingInFrench]
Yes and No ! This set of page comes from user's initiative as you. Portals can be considered as official because there are on Debian Wiki. On other hand, the official page assembled information of the Wiki is the ["FrontPage"]. In brief, it's not the most important question. The real question is: Is this portal answer to my needs ? If you reply Portal concept must be more stable, more hold and more translated. Next, maybe we can update the frontpages ?
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z) "Portal_Welcome" will be renamed "?FrontPage/PortalProposal". It's more understandable To prepare the update of frontpage, all pathes in banner don't must integrate "Portal_Welcome" but "FrontPage" pages as root page ?Anchor(editor-guide)
Could you have a look at ["DebianWiki/EditorGuide"] : Contributions (there) & Feedback (here) are welcome. Thanks, -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-10T23:58:26Z) Very good job ! -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:44:25Z) -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-25T20:49:22Z) Could we define ["DebianWiki/EditorGuide"] as the referent page about Debian Wiki Policy ? In this case, can we write this at this top of its page ? ?Anchor(translations)
PaoloPan had started a discussion thread about translations on [:?WikiMeta#translation:WikiMeta] a while ago. Shouldn't we have that discussion about translation on that page ? ChristianPerrier has been doing massive amounts of translations for Debian. Google : [http://www.google.com/search?q=wiki+translation+site%3Alists.debian.org%2Fdebian-i18n%2F "search wiki translation site:lists.debian.org/debian-i18n/"] -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-11T23:52:57Z) Another problem are translated pages, there's no convention used (check the FrontPage translations for an example). There's been talk about the lack of proper i18n support in MoinMoin, like the checks for outdated translations that the current Debian website is doing.GuillemJover note: the FrontPage is an exception. DebianWiki content use the describe scheme. -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-14T23:49:02Z) I find it a bit messy to combine all the languages in one wiki. The ideal would be to have one sub-site for each language, either something like en.wiki.debian.org/ or wiki.debian.org/en/. But this would require more work from the [?DebianWikiAdministrators administrators] to keep the system up to date, etc. I don't know what the second best solution would be, but it's worth discussing. Maybe we could have the language tag (Fr, De...) as part of the page name like this: ?FrSomePageInFrench, ?DeSomePageInGerman, etc. -- AugustinMa ?DateTime(2007-10-09T04:05:04Z) en.wiki.debian.org would be nice but we can't : Each (language-)site would be a separate instance of moinmoin (Separate user accounts ; "Internal" links wouldn't work, etc). -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-14T23:49:02Z) ["Debian"] ["DebianFrench"] ["DebianGerman"] ["DebianRussian"] When using the FindPage, all translations are grouped. -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-10T21:57:29Z) That's what's currently in use (mostly), let's stick to it. -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-14T23:49:02Z) Like [:?DebianWikiConventionsDiscussion#links:here], can we change in ?BRExample: [:DebianReleases:Les versions de Debian] [:DebFrAmiloM:Some improvements for Fujitsu-Siemens laptop] Bye.?BR -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-12T19:23:10Z) Felipe Augusto van de Wiel - Monday 22 October 2007 05:59:55 -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-24T18:42:15Z) Suffixed method: "?PageName" + "Language" like ?DebianIntroductionFrench Prefixed method: "Language" + "/" + "?PageName" like PortugueseBR/DebianIntroduction I don't know what's the best way. You suggest that "Prefixed method" is the best for using with PO. Why ? Felipe Augusto van de Wiel -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-24T18:42:15Z) Felipe Augusto van de Wiel Space, because it doesn't polute it, FrontPage will always be FrontPage, doesn't matter the language, probably, build statistics and l10n tools on top of this models would be easier, considering po4a and this model. IMHO the <?PageName><Language> was a natural extension of the wiki model and an inheritance from wikis that doesn't support URLs that looks like folders. There is another point that need to be considered that is related with the Content Negotiation, MoinMoin supports it in some way and it probably needs to be considered while defining the recommended procedure for Debian Wiki. RaphaelHertzog Wednesday 24 October 2007 21:11:12
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-25T20:10:08Z) This page is called Translated page is named like "Language" + "/"+ "?NameOfReferentPage" Referent page: ?SomeThing (optionnal) To help user that doesn't speak english, you can create a Content of the linker: #redirect French/Something
(Optional for short, obligatory for important article) {i} [:CategoryRedundant:Redundant pages]: [:ARedundantPage:A redundant page], [:AnotherRedundantPage:Another Redundant Page]
Wiki Policy Approbation
( Policy suggestion) (if not, return to point (3.) Management understanding reader level
(Graphic User Interface) URL / page naming convention
(Don't count this discussion in 10 days remaining, I'm OK with your policy suggestion) Use of CamelCase
Policy suggestion #1
Policy suggestion #2
Policy suggestion #3
URL / Portals naming
but not very compatible with Moinmoin): ["Portal:Webcam"] Policy suggestion #1
(if you can't, notify discussion english page) Policy suggestion #2
Policy suggestion #3
Policy suggestion #4
Policy suggestion #5
Help to update content
Map
I have see many others but not significant Policy suggestion #1
Knowledge level indicator of article
Beginner
{o} {o} {o} ''Beginner''
{*} {o} {o} ''User''
{*} {*} {o} ''Advanced user''
{*} {*} {*} ''Developer/Contributor''
main portal is composed of four domains : I think the pages (and portals) should be organised according to what the visitor search, not what he/she knows. i.e. Does a visitor in "level 3" have to visit all 3 levels to find what he/she wants ?
Links pointing to articles
(in french)
Debian word anywhere. We know that we will talk about Debian on this Wiki. We are not going to speak about Redhat.
Not native language links finish with destination language (look at suggest #1) Policy suggestion #1
Policy suggestion #2
Policy suggestion #3
(in french) Is it the official portal of Wiki Debian ?
Policy suggestion #1
Debian Wiki /Editor Guide
Pages Translations
(en anglais)
I prefer to finish the name by the translating language. It's easy to find translating pages like: Linking
Linking to the same page, in other language, see Page header below.
Links to non translated page should be prefixed by [en].
to: Links to non translated page should be follow by: (in destination language)
Original message: Du point de vue de quelqu'un qui est abonné à de nombreuses pages du wiki grâce à des abonnements génériques comme "Teams/*" ou "Alioth*", je confirme qu'utiliser la langue en préfixe c'est mieux parce qu'en suffixe, cela veut dire que je recevrai les notifications sur les mises à jour des traductions, ce que je ne souhaite pas (sauf abonnement explicite à Fr/Teams/* ou ?FrTeams par exemple). For someone who take out lot of subscriptions of this Wiki using generic subscription like "Teams/*" or "Alioth*", I confirm using prefixed method is better than suffixed. In suffixed mode, I would received all translation pages (I don't want this except explicit subscription). Policy suggestion #1
Referent Page. When you modify a translated page, you must update or notify the referent page