[webdev] Re: which way to go - pt2

[Tom Hull <thull2@xxxxxxx>]

I was just in the middle of responding to Dale's previous post when
this one came in. I've appended the previous post and my comments.

Dale W Hodge wrote:
> Okay, it's been nearly a week since our last discussion of the website. Very
> few people seem to be getting involved, though my page counter says quite a
> number of people are looking at aclug.neuralmatrix.org.  Do we have any
> stats on aclug.notwerk.net?

I don't have this offhand. I think we have 18 registered users (which may
count one twice), which is up from about a dozen a couple of weeks ago.

> What about content? What kind of content should we have, and just as
> importantly, how do we go about creating it?  Ideally, our user base would
> tell us what we need. So far, my pleas have fallen on deaf ears.

I started a content plan, noted below. This is more reference oriented
than what would be possible with postnuke (without, that is, a fairly
substantial amount of programming; however, I do call for programming
on the openacs side, which looks easier to me).

> So, do we continue to hash things out here on this mailing list, do we post
> some things on the discussion list, or do we schedule another meeting?  I'm
> open to suggestions.

Nobody commented on my meeting request last time. I think it's still in
order.

Regarding previous mail:

Dale W Hodge wrote:
 >>-----Original Message-----
 >>From: webdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxx []On Behalf Of Tom Hull
 >
 >>I don't think the decision as to which website technology we go
 >>with should be based on which kit has the niftiest modules. (If
 >>it did, I have another dozen modules up my sleeve.
 >
 > I know OpenACS has a bunch of modules. But are they really useful?  So far,
 > people don't seem to be using the features currently implemented. That's the
 > discouraging part of this whole effort.

No doubt, it will take a while. Among other things, I think they're
waiting for us to tell them what to do. For example, I asked David
Carmichael to post his monitor for sale to the classifieds; he did
so. A side effect of this is that someone else took a look at the
classifieds, and offered to buy a book from me.

I have no doubt that if we build it they will come. Of course,
building it, that's the bitch.

 >>I think the decision should be made on the
 >>following criteria:
 >>
 >>  1) Who's willing, eager, and competent to work on which platform?
 >>
 >>  2) What's the big picture concept for the website?
 >>
 >>In my mind, #1 is critical. In that case, my position is that if I am
 >>the only person who is willing/eager/competent to work on openacs, then
 >>I'll vote for postnuke.
 >
 > One thing I'll admit to is that a programmer I'm not. If I work long enough,
 > I can usually follow the logic, but could never really write anything
 > useful. I can usually figure out how to make things work, even when they
 > are poorly documented.  I don't mind managing a site as long as I don't have
 > to jump through too many hoops to get the day-to-day stuff done. My personal
 > feeling is that a site should occasionally have a graphic makeover to keep
 > it interesting.  In that vein, it should be easy to change the look and feel
 > without a major amount of work. I'm hoping that OpenACS can be made to work
 > this way.

Most of what needs to be done doesn't need a programmer to do it.

I've already done some things to abstract the web design from the code,
mostly by adding reference to CSS. Changing the header/footer requires
hacking into /tcl/ad-defs.tcl.preload and restarting nsd. There's good
and bad things you can say about that, but it shouldn't be hard to
install any newer/fresher design.

 >>As for #2, I think the alternatives are:
 >>
 >>  1) My concept for the openacs system was to provide two main things:
 >>
 >>      a) an extensible repository of help information
 >>      b) a set of user services and inter-user communication tools
 >>
 >>     There are lots of other things one can do with openacs, but these
 >>     are things that it excels at (albeit with a little extra work).
 >>     The emphasis here is, I think, community building.
 >
 > I suppose this is something I just 'don't get', the community building.  I
 > guess I don't understand what is trying to be accomplished.  Can you give me
 > an example?

I've written and posted a couple of pages which start to explain this:

   http://aclug.notwerk.net/aclug/ed/vision.adp
   http://aclug.notwerk.net/aclug/ed/content.adp

The simplest example is that when someone sends a question to linux-help,
if that question was answered by posting the answer to the website, then
it would always be there, and anyone could look at it in the future,
hopefully saving people the need to re-ask the question. And if the
posted answer isn't good enough, someone could edit it/improve it. For
one example, someone asked for an evaluation of major Linux distros,
and Tom Wallis wrote back with a thoughtful evaluation. That piece of
email, useful as it was, is for all intents lost now -- let's face it,
archived email may be precious but more likely than not there's just
too much noise around it to make it worth the trouble. However, I added
it to the website FAQ, where it is now ensconced as ACLUG's definitive
answer to the question.

But the community building part goes beyond the collective project of
building the website -- it involves recognizing fellow members of the
community. We have, for instance, a community member directory. When
someone adds a comment to an article, that comment is signed, and if
you wonder who's the person who posted that (brilliant|inane) comment,
you can look at the user directory and find out more: e.g., what other
comments that person has posted. Knowing who people are, what they're
into, etc., makes it easier to navigate within the community, and as
this familiarity increases, so does the usefulness of participating
in the community.

 >>  2) The typical use (therefore what it is most fit for) is to provide
 >>     a news portal. The emphasis here is, I think, information access.
 >
 > News, events, and technical resources, I think.
 >
 >>I think that if you find #1 more attractive, openacs is the system of
 >>choice; OTOH, if #2 is the thing that most interests you, then postnuke
 >>is a system that will give you that with significantly less work.
 >
 > Less work is very true.  The question becomes whether we are giving up
 > anything important to get that less work.
 >
 >>That "less work" is a significant issue. As Dale has pointed out, I
 >>started working on the openacs system six months ago, and it hasn't
 >>gotten very far. A lot of that is my fault -- I've had a number of
 >>distractions, and haven't actually been able to put a helluva lot of
 >>work into the project. I also see more distractions on the horizon,
 >>so maybe you should make a choice that is less dependent on me.
 >
 > Well, you weren't supposed to be the only one working on it. But for
 > whatever reason, it seems things tend to fall on one person's shoulders. As
 > you've probably figured out by now, we're working with a very apathetic
 > bunch.

Let me propose a simple test here: We have a Glossary module, which can
be used to provide definitions for technical terms. I initially set this
up with three terms (/etc/passwd, GNU, GPL); I added a fourth today
(initrd). Any registered member should be able to add a term and/or
edit a definition. How about anyone on webdev who'd like to do a
little something for the website add a few terms (if you don't have
a definition, just enter "?" there, and maybe someone else will help
you out)?

BTW, it's not clear, but you can insert HTML in the definition.

 >>I think that it is probably the case that Dale's proof-of-concept
 >>system is mature enough (as is the openacs-based system) that we
 >>should start moving toward a decision here. Let's thrash that out
 >>in email here on webdev, then have a meeting to finalize a decision.
 >>OK?
 >
 > I keep hoping that users will get involved and give us some feedback. So
 > far, people seem to be lurking, but not really trying things out and giving
 > useful feedback.  At this rate, it's going to come down to whatever we can
 > work out between us.

Maybe so. Y'all speak up now. Use it or lose it.

-- 
/*
  *  Tom Hull * thull2 at cox.net * http://www.tomhull.com/
  */