Wiki manual for x2
Wiki manual for x2
Hi all,
I have started the "wikification" of the User Manual.
http://wiki.zabkat.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
The manual is not pretty to look at now, but it will take time to take shape.
I would be using this thread to report updates from time to time, and also call for help as and when needed.
Right now I am focusing only on transferring the contents. This alone will take about 10 days. (I will have to upload all images separately. I want to take this opportunity to update some images, as some of them are based on old windows versions).
Currently I have transferred some pages (text only). They contain junk characters that need to be manually corrected. (Libreoffice's export job is not 100% correct).
Secondly, the pdf-to-wiki conversion is not just the matter of moving the text+images: They are totally different media; and therefore the wiki must be treated in a completely different way.
So I will launch a second round of heavy and ruthless editing later. Don't add anything at present (except local editing).
I have started the "wikification" of the User Manual.
http://wiki.zabkat.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
The manual is not pretty to look at now, but it will take time to take shape.
I would be using this thread to report updates from time to time, and also call for help as and when needed.
Right now I am focusing only on transferring the contents. This alone will take about 10 days. (I will have to upload all images separately. I want to take this opportunity to update some images, as some of them are based on old windows versions).
Currently I have transferred some pages (text only). They contain junk characters that need to be manually corrected. (Libreoffice's export job is not 100% correct).
Secondly, the pdf-to-wiki conversion is not just the matter of moving the text+images: They are totally different media; and therefore the wiki must be treated in a completely different way.
So I will launch a second round of heavy and ruthless editing later. Don't add anything at present (except local editing).
OK although you have raised this a bit late, probably we can migrate if it is REALLY worth it.
What we want is-
1. Able to create well-formatted pages with a rich-editor (no hand-coding)
(including nested tables, images, text+paragraph formatting)
2. Able to export to pdf (or epub) without breaking the original formatting.
3. Security (access-control) in a multi-author environment
Is Docuwiki (or any other system) MUCH better compared to Mediawiki?
(The bloat would not bother us, because we won't be using many features.)
Well, in case we change over, will you take care of migration?
What we want is-
1. Able to create well-formatted pages with a rich-editor (no hand-coding)
(including nested tables, images, text+paragraph formatting)
2. Able to export to pdf (or epub) without breaking the original formatting.
3. Security (access-control) in a multi-author environment
Is Docuwiki (or any other system) MUCH better compared to Mediawiki?
(The bloat would not bother us, because we won't be using many features.)
Well, in case we change over, will you take care of migration?
Sorry, this is the first time ever that I hear about the plans to make a wiki, so that's why I come up with this now.
Because we don't need many features, a MediaWiki is too oversized, I thought. Basically, all wikis are able to do the same stuff though.
Oh, and don't get me wrong, I don't say "whoa, what a bullshit". I like the idea of having a documenting wiki after all, and I don't really care about which system lies beneath it. I was just wondering why it has to be MediaWiki. Editing the Wikipedia takes a bit with my internet connection, that's why ... :lol:
edit: Wikimatrix.org has some en-detail comparison tables, if you are actually interested.
Because we don't need many features, a MediaWiki is too oversized, I thought. Basically, all wikis are able to do the same stuff though.
FCKEditor integration is possible.1. Able to create well-formatted pages with a rich-editor (no hand-coding)
(including nested tables, images, text+paragraph formatting)
Seems so.2. Able to export to pdf (or epub) without breaking the original formatting.
A default user manager is included.3. Security (access-control) in a multi-author environment
"Better" is a question of what you want to achieve. DokuWiki is made for documentation (hence the name), while MediaWiki is probably the most extensible thingy of this goddamn planet, which might be too much in some cases...Is Docuwiki (or any other system) MUCH better compared to Mediawiki?
So far, nothing much has to be migrated, right?Well, in case we change over, will you take care of migration?
Oh, and don't get me wrong, I don't say "whoa, what a bullshit". I like the idea of having a documenting wiki after all, and I don't really care about which system lies beneath it. I was just wondering why it has to be MediaWiki. Editing the Wikipedia takes a bit with my internet connection, that's why ... :lol:
edit: Wikimatrix.org has some en-detail comparison tables, if you are actually interested.
Tux. ; tuxproject.de
registered xplorer² pro user since Oct 2009, ultimated in Mar 2012
registered xplorer² pro user since Oct 2009, ultimated in Mar 2012
Actually we started this discussion some time ago. Probably you missed that thread.
In our past discussion, wikimatrix was mentioned, but we could not make good use of that resource, because these matrix sites are known to have some defective/biased/outdated data. (I came across a similar debate when selecting CMS for another documentation site. When I quoted from http://www.cmsmatrix.org/ site, several people who had actually worked on Drupal and Silverstripe pointed out that that site had many inaccurate entries.)
So even with wikimatrix, the final decision has to be left to experienced admins. However, none of us have such experience.
Listening to people with ANY amount of exposure would only save us from trouble later. Therefore it would be wise for us NOT to be defensive about any past decision.
Even if we have to redo part of the current effort, it may be worth the trouble.
I am only looking for help from people who can migrate a set of interlinked HTML pages using a little scripting.
Thanks for your understanding!
In our past discussion, wikimatrix was mentioned, but we could not make good use of that resource, because these matrix sites are known to have some defective/biased/outdated data. (I came across a similar debate when selecting CMS for another documentation site. When I quoted from http://www.cmsmatrix.org/ site, several people who had actually worked on Drupal and Silverstripe pointed out that that site had many inaccurate entries.)
So even with wikimatrix, the final decision has to be left to experienced admins. However, none of us have such experience.
Listening to people with ANY amount of exposure would only save us from trouble later. Therefore it would be wise for us NOT to be defensive about any past decision.
Even if we have to redo part of the current effort, it may be worth the trouble.
I am only looking for help from people who can migrate a set of interlinked HTML pages using a little scripting.
Thanks for your understanding!
Wikimatrix seems to be quite up-to-date now?
Yep, I probably missed that discussion...? The decision to use that MediaWiki bloatstuff was made there? Oh well ...
Putting HTML into a wiki is merely search&replace, so what?
Yep, I probably missed that discussion...? The decision to use that MediaWiki bloatstuff was made there? Oh well ...
Putting HTML into a wiki is merely search&replace, so what?
Tux. ; tuxproject.de
registered xplorer² pro user since Oct 2009, ultimated in Mar 2012
registered xplorer² pro user since Oct 2009, ultimated in Mar 2012
I have uploaded the manual (text only so far).
I will start uploading the images now.
Just for reference, I have placed each Heading1 and Heading2 paragraph from the pdf manual on a separate page in the wiki. So you can refer to the latest pdf version and check out what is intended to go in each wiki page.
Volunteers can start working on the manual in the following way:
1. Correct the junk characters (delete/rephrase)
2. Start embedding the images in the text
3. Start cross-linking.
4. I had to upload an earlier version 1.7.1.0. All changes later than that will have to be added to the wiki.
I will start uploading the images now.
Just for reference, I have placed each Heading1 and Heading2 paragraph from the pdf manual on a separate page in the wiki. So you can refer to the latest pdf version and check out what is intended to go in each wiki page.
Volunteers can start working on the manual in the following way:
1. Correct the junk characters (delete/rephrase)
2. Start embedding the images in the text
3. Start cross-linking.
4. I had to upload an earlier version 1.7.1.0. All changes later than that will have to be added to the wiki.