FrontPage > ?DebianWikiAdministration > ?DiscussionsStarter > Debian Wiki Conventions Discussion
?TableOfContents(3)
Please sign your comments using @SIG@.
Articles
?Anchor(pages-names)
URL / page naming convention
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)
- {{{ avoid "@=$*
}}}
- What does it mean ?
(Don't count this discussion in 10 days remaining, I'm OK with your policy suggestion)
Use of CamelCase
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, I don't like particulary CamelCasedTitled. I prefer naming conventions [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name like Wikipedia]. -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-10T21:57:29Z)
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)
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z)
- Concise title
- Can using underscore "_" to separte words
Can using CamelCase
- Each word start with uppercase
Don't use these characters:columns : , semicolon ; , space " " , backslash \ , accents é à ö ñ ..., apostrophe '
- Using slash can be use to group same pages
- Translated pages finished with the name of Language (place side by side)
Policy suggestion #2
-- very similar -- FranklinPiat ?DateTime(2007-10-14T23:49:02Z)
Should using CamelCase
- Can use underscore "_" to separate words (not recommended).
First letter of first word should be upper. (["debconf"] + ["DebConf"])
- Special characters shoud be avoided in page names. Using underscores is ok.
- Using slash should be use to group same pages
- Translated pages finished with the name of Language
?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(portals)
Portal concept
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-12T23:09:29Z)
- Hi. I have update the first part of portal to test Pocily proposal. Can you check and validate Policy Proposals #1 ? Next We can reduce the part of this portal discussion by transfering to Wiki Policy. Thanks and good night.
URL / Portals naming
?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] ? but not very compatible with Moinmoin): ["Portal:Webcam"]
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: Portal_Wiki
- In german: Portal_Wiki too ! So you propose finished by country name. good choice. Can we go further ? take exactly the same idea of Page Naming and just add "Portal" prefixe for all language ? Take same example:
In english: ?PortalWiki
In german:?PortalWikiGerman
In french: ?PortalWikiFrench What do you think about this ?
Policy suggestion #1
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z)
- Using separated words with underscore
Translated portal have a translated title Portal_Hardware / Portail_Materiel
When translated page is modified, synchronize english version (if you can't, notify discussion english page)
Policy suggestion #2
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
Policy suggestion #3
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-16T21:17:28Z)
Using separated words with underscore or CamelCase... (conform with regular page naming policy, yet to be choosen).
- Portal's page name needn't (shouldn't?) be prefixed the word "Portal".
Translated portal page name conform with regular page name policy ()
Management understanding reader level
?Anchor(portal-reader-level)
The Portal Welcome is composed in 4 global parts. Each part aggregate other portals by knowledge level. Language using in article must be adapt to reader level. You can differentiate knowledge level like this:
- Beginner: Someone who don't know any thing about Linux, who don't know what is Debian and can have an overview of what is Windows. Articles must be written in no-technical language. This is a beginner in general concept of informatic.
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 (Graphic User Interface)
Advanced user: Someone who understand effectiveness of a shell or want to use Debian as server. Language must be informatic and contained official links or homepages. So, an article characterized Advanced User level is basically based on CLI tools (Command Line Interface).
- Developer/Contributor: Who want to contribute to Debian project. Language is technical and defined. Reader must know himself how to search more informations. Source code and programming languages are get onto.
Knowledge level indicator of article
?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:
Beginner
User
Advanced user
Developer/Contributor
Ready to paste:
{o} {o} {o} ''Beginner'' {*} {o} {o} ''User'' {*} {*} {o} ''Advanced user'' {*} {*} {*} ''Developer/Contributor''
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 Advanced user, but at first, this portal must explain what is a shell and the basic howto. Next, real' howto can be presented. Other example, Portal_Developer (classified Developer/Contributor) must present official references, debian.mentors, your first package howto ...etc and all of what you want when you would like to become a new developer. Maybe we can rename this four levels as Franklin Comment regarding -- 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 (Beginer might be misleadind).
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z) main portal is composed in four domain: ?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(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z) Links are composed like: [:TitlePage:Understandable and concise description] Not native language links finish with destination language: ''(in french)'' or ''(en anglais)''
Assuming that if a page is properly named (as it should be), the "link title" = "page name" 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"].
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(banner)
Articles don't have real imposition in their forms. Just some informations are strongly recommended. A knowledge level indicator (see section A path named note: In this example, the name of pages will be: 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 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)
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: Example, the french portal talking about hardware is named Example, the english portal related to softwares is named They must contain:
Try to write your article in accessible language for user the less expert. In article tagged Try to give two method: a GUI version for
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:08:49Z) Path like: [:FrontPage:Frontpage] > [:Portal_AThing:A thing] > Current Portal Refer to PortalTemplate to respect the way 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 Refer to DefaultTemplate to respect the way
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-11T21:44:25Z) Refer to DefaultTemplate to respect the way
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) {{{||<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 {{{||<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-( [:DebianIntroduction:Introduction of Debian], [:Debian Introduction:Another introduction of Debian] -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-10T21:57:29Z) 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))
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-15T21:23:02Z)
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 ?
I have see many others but not significant Policy suggestion #1a
Beginners, Users, Administrators and Developers 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. Policy suggestion #1
Policy suggestion #2
Is it the official portal of Wiki Debian ?
Policy suggestion #1
Banner
Knowledge level indicator of article) "FrontPage"
"Portal Welcome"
"A_Page"
"A_Page/Discussion"
Supplementary recommendations about portals
Portail_Materiel Supplementary recommendations about articles
Beginner level, this recommendation in obligatory. Policy suggestion #1
(very important to search if exist!) Footer
Policy suggestion #1
Warning
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)
Policy suggestion #1
- Don't tag at the bottom of the page. Warning tag is for authors, not for readers
- Insert tag on the footer page
- Tag must be less aggressive looking like:
{i} [:CategoryRedundant:Redundant pages]: [:ARedundantPage:A redundant page], [:AnotherRedundantPage:Another Redundant Page]
- Page without enough content can be directly merging or remove
When you merge a page, sometimes, it's right to keep dead page and convert it as a redirection #redirect MergingPage (Optional for short, obligatory for important article)
?Anchor(editor-guide)
Debian Wiki /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)
?Anchor(translations)
Pages 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 ?
- I have written the ["DebianWiki/Translation"], based on the current practices i have observed on this wiki. (I haven't included Salokine's proposal... since it's a proposal. The page will have to be updated once there's a standing position.).
- FYI, we might want to ask for advices about translations to some experienced people :
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
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)?BRExample:
[:DebianReleases:Les versions de Debian] (en anglais)
[:DebFrAmiloM:Some improvements for Fujitsu-Siemens laptop] (in french)
Bye.?BR -- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-12T19:23:10Z)
Wiki Policy Approbation
-- SalokineTerata ?DateTime(2007-10-14T21:43:07Z)
- All discussions finish by a resolution. Resolution is a synthesis of discussion, point by point. If no one relaunch discussion after 10 days, resolution is validate.
Once resolution validate, it move to ["DebianWiki/EditorGuide"]. We can resume Policy creation process by:
- Discussion any where on this Wiki
Discussion speak about a policy, move it to ?DebianWikiConventionsDiscussion
- Try to create a stable discussion
Discussion is stable ? try to suggest a resolution ( Policy suggestion) (if not, return to point (3.)
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.)