From: "Ruth A. Kramer" <rhkramer@...>
Date: 2005-02-16T02:08:07+09:00
Subject: Wikis (spawned from Re: Printing why's (poignant) guide to ruby IIRC)

I wamted to reply to the comments on wiki vs. mail lists but I misplaced
the original post--I think it was in the "Re: Printing why's (poignant)
guide to ruby IIRC)" thread:

IIRC, the poster preferred mail lists because he thought it was easier
to search (archived) mail lists for information.

I find searching archived mail lists very difficult, at least with the
"normal" search tools provided by mail archives.  (I haven't used Google
much for that purpose, but if the archive is indexed by Google, things
are much better.)

On the other hand, there are a lot of ways to look at (and use) a wiki. 
Wikilearn is (has been, and will be again) my attempt to capture
snippets of useful information and find them again easily, and not just
for myself but for everyone on the web.  Although someone could "read"
WikiLearn, that is not the normal approach I intend--WikiLearn is
indexed by Google, just go to Google and search for whatever you
want--hopefully (I know), sometimes you will get a hit on a WikiLearn
page, and, with more luck, it will be the resource that "hits the spot"
with just the information you need.

So, for me a wiki is a way to quickly write a web page and put it where
Google can index it.  (It is about the quickest way I know about, so
far, but one of the reasons I'm here is to learn Ruby so I can write the
next wiki like thing which will be even faster (the reason I've
curtailed my additions to WikiLearn in the last year or so is because
creating pages (on TWiki in particular) is just too slow.

Another advantage of a wiki is that if I start a page and have some
errors or omissions, anyone can come along and correct those problems. 
Further, you don't have to quote my text, you can just insert your own
comment (signed or unsigned depending on good wiki practice and perhaps
as customized for a particular site or type of page) at an appropriate
place.

Furthermore, that can minimize the amount of text you have to read
through to get an answer.  I'm sure we've all seen the email threads
that go back and forth for 20 posts and finally develop a short,
succinct answer--but many of the posts quote so much other material that
you go crazy trying to find that answer.  (This can happen in wikis too,
but that is not the goal, and, for example, if you haven't been involved
in the (wiki) thread but come along and see that situation, the goal is
that you delete all that intermediate information and make a "nice"
transition from the question the short, succinct answer.  On the other
hand, some threads result in a difference of opinion, with more than one
"acceptable" (or "irrefutable") answer--then the refactored version of
the page could say something like, "40 people weighed in on this
subject, 22 felt the world was round, 16 believe it is flat, and 2 have
held out for other views". ;-)

I don't know how to edit an email thread to create such a summary. ;-)

regards,
Randy Kramer

PS: I don't know if I mentioned that Google was indexing WikiLearn about
once every two weeks, I haven't checked recently, it may be more often. 
There is a local search "engine" to search entries since the last Google
crawl.