[R-wiki] Beginner - Intermediate - Advanced... new attempt

Gabor Grothendieck ggrothendieck at gmail.com
Mon Jan 30 16:02:42 CET 2006 

I agree that the technical capabilities of the wiki are impressive and have
mentioned that.  Its the specific organization of the content that is confusing.
I think your comments relate to the technical capability to organize
the content whereas I am referring to the specific organization.

I understand that the structure is not fixed and somewhat amphorous
yet the top level categories would tend to be set in stone at the beginning
and therefore need to be well thought out.

On 1/30/06, Philippe Grosjean <phgrosjean at sciviews.org> wrote:
> Hello Gabor, Damian, and the others,
>
> As you have noticed, I consider that we are doing collaborative work,
> and that all ideas have to be considered. However, regarding Gabor's
> comments, I must repeat what I said: "**please, learn a little bit more
> about Wikis, and you will realize that there is no point in what you
> tell here!**".
>
> You point on http://mini.net/tcl/ as an example of a well-organized Wiki
> site. Yes, it is. But, have you noticed that the Wiki engine they use
> has NO WAY TO ORGANIZE PAGES on the server at all!!!??? No namespaces,
> no meaningful names of the pages, just a number, probably incremented
> for every new page. Just click on any link and look at the URL, it is
> something like: http://wiki.tcl.tk/11485. Well, excellent organization,
> isn't it?
>
> So, how is this site so well organized? ONLY THANKS TO TABLES OF CONTENT
> which are other Wiki pages written AFTER the other page, and that
> collect links to those other pages in a logical structure.
>
> So, now, what do we have in DokuWiki? We have the potential to create
> *namespaces*, and subnamespaces and subsubnamespaces, etc., with
> *meaningful names*. Idem for the *pages*: you can give meaningful names
> to them. So, it gives an opportunity to have a logical structure on the
> SERVER'S DISK, on contrary to the TCL Wiki site. For me, it is an
> advantage, and I want to think a little bit at a good structure on the
> server's disk. That is what we all currently looking for.
>
> Now, please, READ AGAIN WHAT I WROTE in a previous mail:
>  > [...]
>  > 2) The second mechanism is the possibility to write custom,
>  > well-organized, table-of-content that sort material in the wiki.
>  > Someone could, for instance, decide to write a TOC for a biologist
>  > beginning using R from a Systat background (something really specific
>  > thus), and he could collect together the material he thinks is useful
>  > for such a reader (and the skill tag on the pages would help also to
>  > spot where material for beginners is located). Such TOCs are, indeed,
>  > similar to 'Task Views' on CRAN, in a way.
>
> This is exactly the same kind of tables of content that Tcl uses. Now,
> you have certainly noticed that there is a NEW TOC in the TCL web site,
> and that it is much better organized than the old one. The reason is: it
> is almost impossible to write a good TOC without the material... Things
> get organized when you write them. So, it is too early to write good
> sidebars (alias TOCs) for the R Wiki, because the site is still empty.
> It is just enough to know that the mechanism is available, so that we
> make sure we can do it at a later time.
>
> So, please, think about this, and stop argument here. It would be much
> more useful if you start thinking at a good organization of the R Wiki,
> that is, if you start sketching a sidebar... (but personnally, I
> consider it is a little too early, so, I leave this task for the future).
>
> Best,
>
> Philippe Grosjean
>
> P.S.: the skill icons are only indications in the pages, they are not a
> way to organize material per se. They are just a little bit like the
> icons that appear on your T.V. to tell that a film is not meant for
> children yonger than a given age. Nobody will ever organize the T.V.
> program, based on these icons,... but nobody will program a film tagged
> with the 'over 16' icon during the early afternoon! This is exactly the
> same for the skill icons, they are just an indication suggesting that a
> given page is good for beginners, or should only be left for experts.
> So, I think there is no reason to start a war about such little details.
> Also, remember that we could design a CSS style that hides those icons
> in the pages, for those who do not like them.
>
> Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
> > Overall these are my impressions:
> >
> > - the technical aspects of the wiki are impressive
> >
> > - I don't agree that a wiki is necessarily disorganized as the examples below
> > which I previously posted and repeat at the end show.  The current
> > confusing organization needs to be redone and using one of them as a model
> > would be one way since they are seem reasonably well done.
> >
> > - the beginner/intermediate/expert are not only not useful, but actually
> > detract by providing clutter.  I don't think its adequate just to say not to
> > use them if you don't like them.  I don't think they should be an
> > organizing principile of the wiki.
> >
> >   Tcl - http://mini.net/tcl/
> >        - this one has over 1000 pages
> >
> >  Common Lisp - http://www.cliki.net/index
> >
> >  PHP - http://www.php.net/manual/en/
> >         - not sure what to call this but users can add comments to end
> > of each page.
> >
> >  Lua - http://lua-users.org/wiki/
> >
> > On 1/29/06, Philippe Grosjean <phgrosjean at sciviews.org> wrote:
> >
> >>Please, please, consider this:
> >>
> >>**Stop thinking you could ever control the structure of a Wiki!**
> >>
> >>By the way it is working (everybody can add pages everywhere), it is
> >>going to be unstructured, by nature!
> >>
> >>Also, stop thinking that the Wiki can be restricted to a given use:
> >>again, you don't control what people add to it. So, it is not reasonable
> >>to think that only material useful for beginners will be added, for
> >>instance.
> >>
> >>So, without a new idea about how to tag material regarding the skill of
> >>the user, the Wiki is going to suffer the same problem as does the
> >>current R online help: beginners have problems to find essential stuff,
> >>because it is not clearly separated from the rest.
> >>
> >>Currently, there are two mechanism I think about to help make a distinction:
> >>
> >>1) the novice/user/expert tag. I think that, now, it is easy enough:
> >>everything is at user level, except:
> >>
> >>  - trivial things for someone that can install, start and run at least
> >>basic analyses in R. This material is clearly meant to help novices to
> >>start using R... and it should be tagged as such, so that other users
> >>can rapidly skip these pages (when they see the icon, thus, before
> >>reading anything).
> >>
> >>  - tricky stuff that a "normal" user does not really need to work with
> >>R, but that can be interesting for experts, or people willing to become
> >>experts (and thus, try to know a little bit more about the internals, or
> >>details about R). This material should be tagged as "expert", so that
> >>the other readers can skip these pages/sections and would not feel
> >>stupid just because they don't understand what is there.
> >>
> >>A final word: it is the author that is responsible for the tag on his
> >>page, and the tag is an optional feature (Gabor: if you don't like it,
> >>or still do not know how to rate material,... just don't use it, right?)
> >>
> >>2) The second mechanism is the possibility to write custom,
> >>well-organized, table-of-content that sort material in the wiki. Someone
> >>could, for instance, decide to write a TOC for a biologist beginning
> >>using R from a Systat background (something really specific thus), and
> >>he could collect together the material he thinks is useful for such a
> >>reader (and the skill tag on the pages would help also to spot where
> >>material for beginners is located). Such TOCs are, indeed, similar to
> >>'Task Views' on CRAN, in a way.
> >>
> >>Of course, I am open to any other *positive* and *realistic* proposition
> >>to help organize material in the Wiki, but I suggest you look at other
> >>Wikis, and perhaps also, you start making you own personal Wiki before
> >>commenting, because I feel that a couple of negative comments originate
> >>from people that do not fully understand what a Wiki really is.
> >>Best,
> >>
> >>Philippe Grosjean
> >>
> >>Damian Betebenner wrote:
> >>
> >>>I agree that the categorization into distinct categories is futile. I think that there are much
> >>>more meaningful characterizations of the content that can be made that will help the user
> >>>navigate its contents.
> >>>
> >>>The goal in designing the Wiki, I think, is to allow the user to zero in on what they're
> >>>interested in as quickly as possible. Someone mentioned recently on the list-serv
> >>>that the list-serv archives are not ideally structured for someone wishing to get
> >>>a question answered. Thus, the same questions are asked over and over.
> >>>
> >>>The R language already comes with a "dictonary" like structure for its commands. However,
> >>>when you aren't exactly sure what command you need, its tough to know what command
> >>>to look at.
> >>>
> >>>As a coder, often the most useful thing to me is a well done example. Some of the examples
> >>>in the R command help are wonderful, but I often discover them inadvertantly. What
> >>>I will use the Wiki primarily for it to examine really nice examples that people add. That
> >>>will lead me to examine the syntax more carefully which will likely in turn lead me to other
> >>>examples. It's this back and forth that is the power of hypertext. A Wiki strength is its
> >>>ability to present code alongside graphics and text annotation.
> >>>
> >>>Thus, my recommendation is that a navigation layout be thought up that (in addition to
> >>>other functionality) allows the user to quickly procced to examine certain types of
> >>>examples (e.g., string manipulation, categorical data analysis, etc.). I don't know if this could
> >>>be faciliated using some  sort of metadata, but being able to go back and forth between
> >>>examples and the commands that make up the examples seems most useful.
> >>>
> >>>Damian
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> |  On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:12:39 -0500
> >>> |  Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendieck at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>I must say I find this entire beginner/intermediate/expert baffling.
> >>>>>>I have no idea what goes where and to me its an categorization
> >>>>>>that is difficult to get right and probably not a good idea.  I would
> >>>>>>just omit the whole thing.  If someone can point to another
> >>>>>>language that has used such a categorization successfully
> >>>>>>I would be willing to modify this viewpoint but I know of none.
> >>>>>>I think more useful categorizations have already
> >>>>>>been discussed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>On 1/28/06, Philippe Grosjean <phgrosjean at sciviews.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Hello,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Following the previous discussion about the icons with three users (some
> >>>>>>>people did not like them and found them not very clear nor informative
> >>>>>>>enough), I make a second trial.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>This time, there are still three skill levels ("novice", "user" and
> >>>>>>>"expert"), but no possible mixture (like "novice" + "user", excluding
> >>>>>>>"expert", for instance).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I also considered Tont Plate's suggestion of an explicit text, but I
> >>>>>>>integrate this text in the icon (I also took Ben Bolker's suggestion to
> >>>>>>>use road signs ;-).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I designed three series of icons:
> >>>>>>>1) With text for top of page,
> >>>>>>>2) Big icon without text, for sections on the page and
> >>>>>>>3) small icons without text, to rate with discrete icons lists or table
> >>>>>>>of content entries.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>The Wiki site is modified to use these icons, so, you can make your own
> >>>>>>>idea more easily. Look for instance at:
> >>>>>>>- http://www.sciviews.org/_rgui/wiki/doku.php?id=start for the explanation,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>- http://www.sciviews.org/_rgui/wiki/doku.php?id=rtips:data:import for
> >>>>>>>the use in a page and,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>- http://www.sciviews.org/_rgui/wiki/doku.php?id=beginners:introduction
> >>>>>>>for usage in a table of content.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Once again, I am waiting for your valuable comments!
> >>>>>>>Best,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Philippe Grosjean
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>R-sig-wiki mailing list
> >>>>>>>R-sig-wiki at r-project.org
> >>>>>>>https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-wiki
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>>R-sig-wiki mailing list
> >>>>>>R-sig-wiki at r-project.org
> >>>>>>https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-wiki
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Damian Betebenner
> >>>Educational Research, Measurement & Evaluation
> >>>Lynch School of Education
> >>>Boston College
> >>>Chestnut Hill, MA 02467
> >>>
> >>>(617) 552 4491
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>R-sig-wiki mailing list
> >>>R-sig-wiki at r-project.org
> >>>https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-wiki
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

More information about the R-sig-wiki mailing list