permaculture

[Niels Corfield <mudguard@gmail.com>]

thanks rich,

I am ccing your posrt to AndyG.

As a quick response.
I think the function/feature we could be easily limited by saying, and 
this is my personal view,

   * no group articles, all content will remain moderated.
   * unmoderated contribution happens in the users/groups personal
     area, or simple news stream type affair.

However key development goals still remain:

   * photo handling and hosting, or linking to Flickr, and descent
     offline upload tools, or email upload.
   * online community
   * CMS for group/user pages/website
   * tag-based structure
   * flexible/customizable display of content/search results -either
     through cookies, or member preferences

Cheers again, will read your post thoroughly and reply again.
As fo a meet, how about the Convergence?

All the best,
Niels

webmaster@pfaf.org wrote:

> > Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:30:54 -0400
> > From: "Lawrence F. London, Jr." <lfl@intrex.net>
> > Subject: Re: [permaculture] Callout for Coder or Technology for
> >         Permaculture Assoc Britain Web Development
> > To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
> > Message-ID: <4499824E.1060600@intrex.net>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> >
> > Niels Corfield wrote:
> >
> >
> >    
> >
> > > The link for PFAF is broken.
> > >
> > > Are you loading it OK?
> > >
> > > Know of a route to it from an alternative URL?
> > >      
> >    
> >
> > > > From: webmaster@pfaf.org
> > > >
> > > >         http://82.138.219.137/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
> > > > a semantically marked up wiki with the pfaf and a few other datasets in.
> > > >        
> > It works intermittently; is a demo site. Keep trying or email Rich.
> >
> >    
> Sorry for not replying to this thread. I've been away for a week doing 
> ki-aikido practicing not thinking about computers.
>
> As Lawrence says its running on my machine at home which gets switched 
> off some of the time, and will not have been on for much of last week. 
> This week should have more connectivity.
>
> I'm currently looking for a different host running MySQL 4.1 and PHP 5.0.
>  
>
> > > > Niels Corfield wrote:
> > > >        
> >    
> >
> > > > > 1. Increasing member contribution. Moving to a largely member-driven
> > > > > content. Providing fully-featured personal/project web-presence
> > > > > hosting services.
> > > > > 2. Embedded delicious-style Tagged database retrieval technology
> > > > > throughout the site. Possible opensource technologies include:
> > > > > Scuttle.org
> > > > > 3. Image hosting. Obviously we would like to have something as slick
> > > > > as Flickr integrated into the site but at the very least I want to
> > > > > see at least the basic functionality with technologies for
> > > > > uploading directly from members PC/Macs. Possible technologies:
> > > > > Gallery 2, Coppermine (as used by Geoff Lawton).
> > > > >          
>
> I've had a few chats with Andy about this, curious as to how this fits 
> with the work Diana is doing.
>
> A lot is going to depend on the level of coding you want to engage with 
> you could
> a. Write everything yourself using php/mysql.
>         +ve very configurable
>         -ve lots of development time needed, in depth knowledge required
> b. Use a framework or Content Management ssystem like Plone, Ruby on Rails
>         +ve configurable, stable code base for things like user login
>         -ve needs some study to get to grips with the framework
> c. Use and modify mature programs like mediawiki
>         +ve easy to get up and running fast
>         -ve may limit methods of contribution/look and feel
>
> Personally I've always gone with a. as its most fun, although I've been 
> tempted by Ruby on Rails.
>
> See
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_application_frameworks
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_source_content_management_systems
>
> Interaction
> -----------
>
> Its worth thinking about how people want to contribute
>
> a) Adding comments.
> 	This is what I've used on the pfaf site. Basically people can add a 
> short comment to any page on the site. I've found this to be very 
> successful and we are getting about 10 contributions a day. Its the 
> simplest way for people to interact and does not have any learning 
> curve. It may be necessary to moderate comments to prevent spam.
>
> b) Adding images.
> 	This should not be too difficult to implement. Basically all you need 
> to do is handle a file upload, save the image in a file and use a table 
> to store the file location and meta data. Some checking of images may be 
> necessary.
>
> c) Adding other documents. (PD F's, word docs)
> 	Much like images. May work well for PC designers who are likely to be 
> producing documents in other formats.
>
> d) Adding links.
> 	I guess this would be popular: I'm always getting email requests for 
> links to be added. Works much like a comment although you need to check 
> for valid URL's and spam prevention measures.
> I've a quasi released link submission system at
>         http://www.pfaf.org/links/addlink.php
> which has some form of tagging. I'm hoping to build a distruted links 
> system whenever I get the time.
>
> e) Discussion forum.
> 	Actually integrating a discussion forum into the association website, 
> rather than as an external site would be a good step. The most popular 
> system is PHP-BB which I personally dislike. I don't like to look and 
> feel, all the silly emoticons, the administrative interface and the way 
> email notification works.
>
> f) tagging
> 	In some ways this is very simple to do. All that is needed is a table 
> to hold the tags and the objects they relate to in. I'm not a big fan of 
> delicious and flicker, they seem to me to be rather closed systems. By 
> that I mean there is a community of taggers working in the same 
> environment, to get the most out of it you need to become part of that 
> comunity. For permaculture we all ready have a community and I feel 
> overall we should work towards strengthening that community and not 
> create a separated sub community. Hence more distributed systems feal 
> more appropriate to me.
>
> g) blogs
> 	Content is king and I'd love to see some permaculture blogs. There is 
> plenty of scope for a space for opinion pieces and regular new content 
> could help gain repeated visitors and get some debates going. It would 
> be great to see something like a "permaculture site of the week" similar 
> to Scott's Botanical Links of the day
>           http://www.ou.edu/cas/botany-micro/bot-linx/
> A bit of work to find people willing to write some quasi-regular pieces, 
> install and configure the latest software and your away.
>
> h) Wiki's.
> 	A very big conceptual jump to the rest. To make a wiki work you need at 
> least 5 active contributers. There is a small learning curve for use the 
> system, both technologically and sociologically which way deter some 
> participants. There are only a handful of permaculturalists who have a 
> fair understanding of the wiki concept, although this could grow.
>
> The following is from an old post of mine to the pcplantdb mailing list, 
> when in my hyper enthusiastic wiki phase.
>
> MediaWiki
> ---------
>
> In a wiki each page consists of a simplified form of html with an easier
> syntax. It allows headings
> == A heading ==
> === A second level heading ===
> paragraphs are just made with empty lines. Italic and bold
> ''italic'', '''bold'''. Lists are marked by a *
> * First level list item
> ** Second level list item
>
> This is all the basic formatting needed for most documents. The syntax
> is easier than html so its easier for new users to get involved. A low
> barrier  to entry and a shallow learning curve are both very desirable
> features.
>
> Fundamental to the wiki philosophy is the idea that anyone can edit the
> whole text. This can, and does work well. People have probably noticed
> that my posts have a high number of spelling and grammar mistakes, a
> wiki is ideal here as others with a better grasp of English than I
> can correct all my mistakes. It allows the whole text to improve with
> time. On the other hand I tend to be better at things like categorizing
> articles, seeking out references etc. In general the process will tend
> to improve the article, each new edit tends to make the article better.
> If an edit detracts from the article then it is easy for some other
> editor to change the article back.
>
> There are several features which help with the process.
> (A bit of wiki slang an editor is anyone who edits a page)
>
> Each article also has a talk-page. Here editors can discuss the article
> and propose changes, this allows consensus to occur without having the
> discussion on the main article. A recent discussion I had on a talk page
> led to the construction of a new article.
>
> Registered users can have a watch list. Here changes to any pages which
> you have a particular interest in can be recorded. This allows
> the user to quickly see what articles have changed and review the
> changes. Watchlists are one of the reasons why vandalism is quickly
> fixed as the vandalism can be quickly spotted and corrected.
>
> Linking
> -------
>
> The wiki model allows easy linking, just include the name of an article
> in square brackets: [[Salix alba]] and the article will be linked. Very
> easy and probably better than the WikiWord syntax which required
> composition of two words with a capital in the middle. Such links are
> one directional.
>
> There is also the concept of a category, categories allow a form of
> bi-directional links. For example the Permaculture article is a member
> of the Sustainable Agriculture category. This is indicated by adding a
> link [[Category:Sustainable agriculture]] to the Permaculture article.
> Visiting the Sustainable Agriculture category will show all article in
> that category. The category system is very flexible, its not a
> hierarchal tree more a web of links, as time progresses the set of
> categories can alter as more articles are added and categories fill up.
> When they get too full a category can usually be split into two or more
> sub categories and the articles divided appropriately. Categories can be
> members of other categories which allows a topical map to be constructed.
>
> Another mechanism templates is also very powerful. Templates work by a
> simple inclusion system, the code in template is just included in the
> article using the syntax {{templatename}}. These allow standard messages
> to be included. Templates can also have parameters, written as
> {{templatename|parameter}} or {{templatename|paramname = value}}.
> The templates themselves have a limited programing facility with if and
> foreach statements.
>
> Templats allow a common format to be used. All plants use a taxobox to
> record names and classifications of plants, for example ragwort
> has
> {{Taxobox_begin | name = Ragwort}}
> {{Taxobox_begin_placement }}
> {{Taxobox_regnum_entry | taxon = [[Plant]]ae}}
> {{Taxobox_divisio_entry | taxon = [[Flowering plant|Magnoliophyta]]}}
> {{Taxobox_classis_entry | taxon = [[Dicotyledon|Magnoliopsida]]}}
> {{Taxobox_ordo_entry | taxon = [[Asterales]]}}
> {{Taxobox_familia_entry | taxon = [[Asteraceae]]}}
> {{Taxobox subfamilia entry | taxon = [[Asteroideae]]}}
> {{Taxobox tribus entry | taxon = Senecioneae}}
> {{Taxobox_genus_entry | taxon = ''[[Senecio]]''}}
> {{Taxobox_species_entry | taxon = '''''S. jacobea'''''}}
> {{Taxobox_end_placement}}
> {{Taxobox_section_binomial_botany| binomial_name = Senecio jacobaea|
> author =[[Carolus Linnaeus|L.]]}}
> {{Taxobox_end}}
> this will cause the information to be displayed as a nice table see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ragwort
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_read_a_taxobox
>
> Templates also work well with categories. For example a 'flora of'
> template could be defined to list a plant as part of the native flora of
> a particular country. For example we could used {{flora of|China}}
> which would automatically place the plant in the category 'flora of
> China'. Most of the fields we are interested in could be represented as
> such templates {{Height|10}} {{Edible uses|bread}}.
>
> There are some limitations of the template/category system. It is not
> possible to include additional info in a category link, for example any
> reference to why it is included or a rating as to how good a particular
> uses is. It works less well for numeric fields like height.
>
> In RDF terms it does not allow a full triple
> [object|relationship|subject] [Budlia|food plant for|butterflies], but
> does come close.
>
> In conclusion
> -------------
>
> The wiki model, in particular the MediaWiki implementation, covers
> many of the features we need. It allows for extensible pages so new
> sections could easily be added without being limited by the underlying
> data structure. It has a powerful, flexible and extensible linking
> system which nearly meets our needs. Its also an out of the box system
> so little work to get it running. Out of interest there is a
> permaculture wiki city http://permawiki.wikicities.com/
> but its rather empty at the moment.
>
> --
>
> Disadvantages of MediaWiki
> --------------------------
>
> It is a big system, at each run about 30 php files need to be included 
> and a whole bunch of SQL queries executed. The end result of this is 
> that it takes 2 seconds on my computer to deliver a page. Not a critical 
>  lag though.
>
> It requires that all participants are happy to work towards consensus on 
> the articles. Often this works well and the permaculture page
>         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permaculture
> has seen numerous small improvements gradually making a better article. 
>  The more controversial a topic the higher the likelihood of 
> disagreements and some articles like homeopathy have had endless 
> discussion never really reaching consensus. Coupled with this is a large 
> dispute resolution system and Byzantium beauracracy needed when a 
> million people work together.
>
> Wiki do require eternal vigilance. There will always be some form of 
> vandalism/spam and "POV" pushers - people with a very strong point of 
> view on an issue willing to fight to the bitter end, which can skew 
> articles. Some parts of the wikipedia system to tend to encourage 
> polarized debates. ALL human life is in a wiki community!
>
> Whilst mediawiki can be adapted to allow question and answer systems and 
> are passable as a discussion forum it is not the best system for these 
> uses. I'd only recommend it when there is central need for collaborative 
> documents. If the focus is elsewhere use a different system.
>
>         
> Enough for now. Feel free to email me and I may also be able to comeup 
> to Leeds for expenses, if you want a more extensive chat meeting.
>
> End of the day, its a case of applying some permaculture principles. 
> Observe what the permaculture online community is like, what are the 
> resources what are the needs, then engage in the design.
>
>         Rich
>