Difference between revisions of "subwikis"

from HTYP, the free directory anyone can edit if they can prove to me that they're not a spambot
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (MediaWikiDoc:Subwikis moved to Subwikis)
(significant rework; bits moved elsewhere)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Techniques]]:
+
[[Computing]]: [[Software]]: [[Ideas]]: [[Subwikis]]
Software: [[MediaWiki]]: [[MediaWikiDoc:Subwikis|Subwikis]]
+
 
==Benefits of Subwikis==
+
"Subwiki" is kind of a working label used to describe a set of features for which there seems to be a need in wiki software but which, as of yet, does not seem to exist.
The basic question is this: Is there any need for the idea of subwikis?
+
==The Problem==
I've been experimenting around with loading the same wiki data from
+
One limitation which keeps showing up when attempting to use [[wiki]] software as a general content-management tool is that you often end up with areas of the wiki that are of particular interest to certain people but of relatively low interest to others — and, likewise, the people interested in a particular area may have relatively low interest in the rest of the wiki. (Let's call these people who are interested only in a certain area "special interest users", because they come up often.)
different files on the same server, so that I could have:
+
 
*'''Definitely Needed'''
+
This leads to a few minor awkwardnesses:
** A different logo, different CSS styles (different default and maybe
+
 
different styles available)
+
* Articles may have to be carefully named to indicate the context in which they belong, e.g. several neighborhood groups sharing a wiki might want to have articles entitled "Crime Watch", but only one of them can actually use that name; the others, at least, will need to add some clarifying context to the title, e.g. "Pinecrest Area Crime Watch". Ideally, ''all'' the articles should have this clarifying context, since each such article is primarily of interest to its respective neighborhood.
** Different links on the sidebar (or same links, but they bring up
+
* Navigational and look-and-feel issues:
text appropriate to the project)
+
** The "main article" for the special interest doesn't serve well as a home page:
** A different default page ([[Main Page]])
+
*** The logo is the main wiki's logo, and is not specific to the special interest
*'''Would be a big help'''
+
*** There is no way to customize the stylesheet or skin for articles in the special interest area
** A different default namespace, so that new articles were
+
*** The navigation bar points to articles relating to the main wiki, rather than to articles relating to the special interest
automatically prefixed with the subwiki's project name, and articles
+
** The special interest user may tend to wander out of the pages related to their special interest and get lost, as all the navbar links will point (as they do for the special interest "main article") to articles relating more to the main wiki than to their special interest
prefixed with that name were automatically shown without it in the
+
** Extra effort has to be expended to provide any kind of aid to navigation within the special interest area, or indeed even minimal links "back home" to the special interest "main article". Although this can be done reasonably well with templates, it adds an extra layer of effort required in order to maintain the special interest area and it adds extra clutter to pages within the special interest area.
title
+
* Special interest users entering the wiki from the main site may be puzzled as to how to find the set of articles which interests them, unless they have been given the URL of the main article for that interest-area (e.g. http://htyp.org/index.php/Pinecrest_Road_Neighborhood) — which itself is an awkwardness, as long URLs are not only difficult to remember and type, but also difficult to fit conveniently onto tear-off sheets or business cards.
** Articles written for the main wiki or for other subwikis would show
+
** '''URL Alternative 1''': use [http://tinyurl.com/ TinyURL] to generate a short URL, and publish that. '''Disadvantage''': The URL gives no clue as to the nature of the site; people do look at things like the domain name to get an idea of whether the site is worth visiting or not.
up with their logo & CSS
+
** '''URL Alternative 2''': create a subdomain (e.g. pinecrest.htyp.org), and have traffic redirected from there to the actual URL of the special interest homepage. '''Disadvantage''': Although this does solve the URL issue, it does not address the other issues.
I originally started out with the idea of just creating a separate wiki
+
==Alternatives==
for each project. At some point, squeakymewmew seemed to be unhappy
+
In addition to the specific alternatives above (which solve only one issue), the other obvious alternative which solves all of the above problems is simply to create separate wikis for each special interest. The disadvantages to this are as follows:
with this idea -- she seemed to want (though it was never 100% clear to
+
* '''Requires webmaster intervention''': a new database must be added to [[MySQL]] for each new wiki, or at the very least the wiki creator has to have the ability to add new tables and must take care to choose a non-conflicting prefix
me) for all my wiki projects to mingle together indistinguishably in
+
* '''No searching across subwikis''': Some users may be interested in several related special interest areas. For example, a user searching for information about setting up scanners under Linux might want to search the "Linux" and "Computer Hardware" areas for articles
the squadwiki.
+
* '''No sharing of users''': Requiring users to create accounts for each area of interest makes it less rewarding to create an account in any of them (since the benefit of registration is limited to the wiki in which you registered) and thus encourages users to maintain a narrow focus and generally puts unwanted barriers between interests and reduces overall interaction. ('''Note''': the MediaWiki development team are working on solutions to [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_login share users between wikis], which would address this one issue.)
I can understand the idea of wanting all those pages to be sociable and
+
* '''No easy way to move articles between special interests''': sometimes a special interest area starts as a single article, or a group of articles which are later seen to be related. Moving articles between wikis while preserving their histories and their links to other articles is doable but tedious.
mingle with their peers, so as to better enhance the value of the main
+
==Proposal==
wiki -- but when each project has its own purpose and vocabulary, this
+
''Some proposed modifications to the existing MediaWiki standard''
gets very confusing. For example, if you see an article called
+
 
"shipping", is it an issuepedia article about ethical issues involved
+
The prime area of concern is that users should be able to dive into specific subject areas on a wiki without worrying
in the shipping industry? Or is it a page about vbz.net's shipping
+
about naming conflicts or contextual miscues (subwikis being more or less an automatic by-product of this functionality).
policies, or some information about where to ship Sluggite Exchange
+
 
items? If you have entirely separate wikis for issuepedia and vbzwiki,
+
Given the extent of the modifications, it may actually be a better idea to start from scratch than to attempt to shoehorn MediaWiki into a role for which it was perhaps never intended. Nonetheless, it may be easier to start out by ''thinking'' of the design in terms of modifications to a known model.
or at least separate *sections* where it's clear what the context of
+
 
any article is, there's no ambiguity.
+
For all the following modifications, I am proposing unlinking the URI from the article name; in other words the URI will be stored separately from the article's displayed title, so they don't need to be the same.
I've pretty much convinced myself, then, that each wikiproject does
 
need to have its own context, where people can safely post an article
 
with a name like "groups" and know that it refers to, say, the Linux
 
"groups" command, because you're in the LinuxWiki.
 
Furthermore, it looks pretty easy to set up a group of wiki projects so
 
that they can all link transparently to each other -- e.g. with the
 
default config of MediaWiki, you can just say
 
<nowiki>[[WikiPedia:Article Name]]</nowiki> and it will
 
create a link to the appropriate [[WikiPedia:Wikipedia|wikipedia]]
 
article (in English) formatted as an intra-wiki link (as opposed to an
 
external link with the little boxes after).
 
So the big question then is: what ''are'' the advantages, if any, of
 
sharing data between wiki projects? And is it worth the bother of
 
trying to do so? So far, here's what I've come up with:
 
# '''Commonality of users''': create an account on one wiki, and you
 
have an account on all of them. Log in to one, you're logged in to all
 
(this may be difficult due to the nature of cookies, but it's still a
 
nice idea.) Even nicer would be if
 
<nowiki>[[User:Yourname]]</nowiki> pointed to the same
 
page, or at least pulled up the same text, across all wikis. Perhaps
 
there's some way to share ''just'' the userbase between wikis? I think
 
I've even seen discussion of this in the mailing lists. (Some of the
 
issues regarding this are discussed
 
[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_login/IMSoP2 here].)
 
# '''Interwiki searching''': The "main" wiki would let you search all
 
the subwikis, whereas searching one of the subwikis would just search
 
within that context. (Perhaps there would be a "[x] search all wikis"
 
option.) Is this useful? Not sure.
 
# '''Interwiki article movement''': In a masterwiki-subwiki arrangement
 
like this, articles which are arguably "interdisciplinary" could be
 
posted in the main wiki, and perhaps later moved to a subwiki if their
 
focus resolved into something more appropriate for one or the other.
 
This would not work as well with separate wikis; the article would have
 
to be replaced with a "forwarding" link on one side, requiring an extra
 
click-through from the user. This could be solved with a little
 
custom-coding to return an
 
http forward instead of a link, but much code would have to be written
 
to allow forwarded pages to be maintained. Also, it often happens that
 
a topic-area starts out small and it only later becomes apparent (after
 
many, many articles have been written) that a separate wiki would be
 
useful -- and while moving a large number of articles from regular
 
space into a namespace isn't exactly quick, it's a lot easier than
 
copying-and-pasting them into the new wiki while leaving forwarding
 
links in the old locations.
 
So we have two things which might be accomplished in other ways, and
 
one which might not be useful. Suggestions? Thoughts?
 
That's all from me for now.
 
--[[User:Woozle|Woozle]] 21:16, 10 Jun 2005 (CDT)
 
==Notes on First Attempt==
 
I was able to get as far as having the front page and other pages of
 
the Hypertwiki to load from a different URL, utilizing a different
 
directory and index.php file on the same server, but I was not able to
 
get it to display nicely (i.e. with the proper stylesheet). Instead, it
 
displayed in the format usually used for printing. I was unable to
 
figure out why it was not displaying correctly; the correct stylesheet
 
data appeared to be loading, the stylesheet's contents appeared
 
correct, and the Page Info tool shows all the images.
 
In order to get this far, the following changes were needed (some were
 
only to change the wiki's home dir from /wiki to /):
 
* modifications to localSettings.php -- several fairly obvious changes
 
* one modification to includes/DefaultSettings.php: "$wgServer =
 
<nowiki>''</nowiki>;"
 
I hate to give up when it seems so close... but I just don't have the
 
time to come to a deeper understanding of MediaWiki at the moment.
 
'''Update:''' It seems very likely that the entire problem with my
 
earlier attempt was that [[.htaccess]] needed to contain a line to tell
 
Apache to deliver .css files as CSS rather than plaintext. Apparently
 
many browsers (including FireFox) will ignore CSS if it isn't sent with
 
the right mime type. --[[User:Woozle|Woozle]] 15:04, 11 Jun 2005 (CDT)
 
==2005-09-26 A little more clarity==
 
A little more clarity on how wiki software should work, to make it
 
easier to implement subwikis &ndash or, more to the point, to be
 
able to dive into specific subject areas on a wiki without worrying
 
about naming conflicts or contextual miscues (subwikis being more or
 
less an automatic by-product)
 
For all the following modifications, I am proposing unlinking the URI
 
from the article name; in other words the URI will be stored separately
 
from the article's displayed title, so they don't need to be the same.
 
 
===Modification 1===
 
===Modification 1===
'''Automatic hierarchical topic-spaces''' with magic delimiter
+
'''Automatic hierarchical topic-spaces''' with magic delimiter character (we'll use "/" so that to avoid conflict with MW
character (we'll use "/" so that to avoid conflict with MW
 
 
"namespaces")
 
"namespaces")
* An article with the URI "whatever/example/something/stuff" is shown
+
* An article with the URI "whatever/example/something/stuff" is shown with the title "stuff" but shown as belonging to the category "something" (e.g. with a linkback, though this should probably be definable by skin/stylesheet) which belongs to "example" etc.
with the title "stuff" but shown as belonging to the category
+
* Internal links on the "whatever/example/something/stuff" page are relative to the current URI -- a syntax suggestion (others are possible):
"something" (e.g. with a linkback, though this should probably be
+
** <nowiki>[[things]]</nowiki> refers to the URI "whatever/example/something/stuff/things", i.e. a sub-article
definable by skin/stylesheet) which belongs to "example" etc.
+
** <nowiki>[[/things]]</nowiki> refers to "whatever/example/something/things", i.e. an article at the same level
* Internal links on the "whatever/example/something/stuff" page are
+
** <nowiki>[[//things]]</nowiki> refers to "whatever/example/things", i.e. a parent-level article (aunt/uncle)
relative to the current URI -- a syntax suggestion (others are
+
** <nowiki>[[////things]]</nowiki> refers to "things", i.e. a root-level article
possible):
+
* The root wiki is treated as another wiki named "@", with an automatic interwiki link in the format "@:URI", e.g. "@:whatever/example" would link to "whatever/example"
** <nowiki>[[things]]</nowiki> refers to the URI
+
 
"whatever/example/something/stuff/things", i.e. a sub-article
+
For longer article titles, the article's URI-name should probably be a shortened version of the title, taking the URI context into account. For instance, "Linux setup and configuration" could have the URI "tech/linux/setup". Under this scheme, a "sub wiki" becomes almost trivial in that you could have a separate domain (e.g. linux.tech.hypertwiki.org)
** <nowiki>[[/things]]</nowiki> refers to
+
-- go straight to a given URI (e.g. tech/linux) and it would appear more or less as if the "Linux" page were the homepage of a completely separate wiki. Links to Linux-relevant articles would not have to be carefully named so as to include "Linux" in the title, as they would now.
"whatever/example/something/things", i.e. an article at the same level
+
 
*** <nowiki>[[//things]]</nowiki> refers to
+
This would probably also largely remove the need for the "category" system, though there should be some way of displaying all sub-articles. A navbar at the left is what comes to my mind, showing at least the current topic (e.g. "Linux") and a list of short-URI sub-article names, with links, and maybe an "expand" link to show the full tree back to the root (perhaps a "root wiki" link for subwikis, to show the current subwiki's location within the master wiki as well). Other automatic links that might be helpful would be "full tree" (all articles under this one, shown as a tree) and "index" (alphabetic index of all articles at any level under the current context).
"whatever/example/things", i.e. a parent-level article (aunt/uncle)
 
*** <nowiki>[[////things]]</nowiki> refers to "things",
 
i.e. a root-level article
 
* The root wiki is treated as another wiki named "@", with an automatic
 
interwiki link in the format "@:URI", e.g. "@:whatever/example" would
 
link to "whatever/example"
 
For longer article titles, the article's URI-name should probably be a
 
shortened version of the title, taking the URI context into account.
 
For instance, "Linux setup and configuration" could have the URI
 
"tech/linux/setup".
 
Under this scheme, a "sub wiki" becomes almost trivial in that you
 
could have a separate domain (e.g. linux.tech.hypertwiki.org)
 
-- go straight to a given URI (e.g. tech/linux) and it would appear
 
more or less as if the "Linux" page were the homepage of a completely
 
separate wiki. Links to Linux-relevant articles would not have to be
 
carefully named so as to include "Linux" in the title, as they would
 
now.
 
This would probably also largely remove the need for the "category"
 
system, though there should be some way of displaying all sub-articles.
 
A navbar at the left is what comes to my mind, showing at least the
 
current topic (e.g. "Linux") and a list of short-URI sub-article names,
 
with links, and maybe an "expand" link to show the full tree back to
 
the root (perhaps a "root wiki" link for subwikis, to show the current
 
subwiki's location within the master wiki as well). Other automatic
 
links that might be helpful would be "full tree" (all articles under
 
this one, shown as a tree) and "index" (alphabetic index of all
 
articles at any level under the current context).
 
 
===Modification 1a===
 
===Modification 1a===
The [[wikipedia:Hierarchy|hierarchy]] need not even be a
+
The [[wikipedia:Hierarchy|hierarchy]] need not even be a [[wikipedia:Tree (graph theory)|tree]] or even necessarily
[[wikipedia:Tree (graph theory)|tree]] or even necessarily
+
[[wikipedia:Directed acyclic graph|acyclic]] in order for this to work. For instance, if we have an article about [[Durham, NC]] -- which is part of [[North Carolina]], but also part of the [[The Triangle, NC|NC Triangle Area]] and part of [[Durham County, NC]] -- we could have the URI "earth/us/nc/durham", but also "earth/us/nc/triangle/" which contains a link to <nowiki>[[durham]]</nowiki> (URI "earth/us/nc/triangle/durham") and "earth/us/nc/durham county/durham" (same). The Durham NC article itself would declare its parents (via a category-like syntax) to be "earth/us/nc", earth/us/nc/triangle", and "earth/us/nc/durham county" (e.g. <nowiki>"[[parent:earth/us/nc]]"</nowiki> -- though this might actually work better using the article ID scheme in option 2).
[[wikipedia:Directed acyclic graph|acyclic]] in order for this to work.
+
 
For instance, if we have an article about Durham, NC -- which is part
+
The main change here, then, would be the addition of "parent"-declaration syntax and corresponding changes in the database
of North Carolina, but also part of the NC Triangle Area and part of
+
(i.e. any article may have an arbitrary number of children ''and'' an arbitrary number of parents, as opposed to an arbitrary number of children and only one parent).
Durham County -- we could have the URI "earth/us/nc/durham", but also
 
"earth/us/nc/triangle/" which contains a link to
 
<nowiki>[[durham]]</nowiki> (URI
 
"earth/us/nc/triangle/durham") and "earth/us/nc/durham county/durham"
 
(same). The Durham NC article itself would declare its parents (via a
 
category-like syntax) to be "earth/us/nc", "earth/us/nc/triangle", and
 
"earth/us/nc/durham county" (e.g.
 
<nowiki>"[[parent:earth/us/nc]]"</nowiki> -- though this
 
might actually work better using the article ID scheme in option 2).
 
The main change here, then, would be the addition of
 
"parent"-declaration syntax and corresponding changes in the database
 
(i.e. any article may have an arbitrary number of children ''and'' an
 
arbitrary number of parents, as opposed to an arbitrary number of
 
children and only one parent).
 
 
===Modification 2===
 
===Modification 2===
'''Primary linking by article ID''' Although I think we should continue
+
'''Primary linking by article ID''' Although I think we should continue to support linking by article name &ndash; as this makes it easier to "request" articles, to create requested articles, and to keep track of article requests &ndash; perhaps the primary means of referencing other articles should be by using their ID in the database. This would largely negate the need for internal "redirects" and link updates when an article's name changes. It would not remove the need for disambiguation" pages, but it would reduce the number of times when a disambiguation page was arrived at instead of the intended article.
to support linking by article name &ndash; as this makes it easier
+
 
to "request" articles, to create requested articles, and to keep track
+
I would also propose that an article's URI could make use of either the article's ID ''or'' title; whether these were kept in separate URI folders (e.g. "sitename.com/a/article_name" vs. "sitename.com/n/3415") would be up to the administrator of each wiki site, in much the same way it is currently their decision to have the wiki located under (e.g.) "/wiki" or "w/" or to just put it in the root folder (as in this wiki). Having them in the same folder would mean that an article's URI
of article requests &ndash; perhaps the primary means of
+
could not be just a number (e.g. "2005") because there might be an article ID with the same number, but with the hierarchical naming as discussed in Modification 1 above, this is less likely to be a problem (e.g. "2005" could have the URI "dates/2005", which would not conflict). Additionally, a site admin might decide to have a rigid format for article ID URIs, e.g. "at least 6 digits, leading zeros if needed" would eliminate the conflict with year-named articles even if they were in the "root", as would having a short prefix such as "n" in front of all article-ID URIs ("sitename.com/n3415").
referencing other articles should be by using their ID in the database.
+
 
This would largely negate the need for internal "redirects" and link
+
Thus, links to existing articles could be of the form <nowiki>[[article name|link text]]</nowiki> or <nowiki>[[0000|link text]]</nowiki>. Perhaps the wiki software would even expand the latter form to include the article name, for human reference: <nowiki>[[3415 Article Name|link text]] </nowiki>.
updates when an article's name changes. It would not remove the need
+
==Related Articles==
for "disambiguation" pages, but it would reduce the number of times
+
* [[Subwikifying MediaWiki]]
when a disambiguation page was arrived at instead of the intended
 
article.
 
I would also propose that an article's URI could make use of either the
 
article's ID ''or'' title; whether these were kept in separate URI
 
folders (e.g. "sitename.com/a/article_name" vs. "sitename.com/n/3415")
 
would be up to the administrator of each wiki site, in much the same
 
way it is currently their decision to have the wiki located under
 
(e.g.) "/wiki" or "w/" or to just put it in the root folder (as in this
 
wiki). Having them in the same folder would mean that an article's URI
 
could not be just a number (e.g. "2005") because there might be an
 
article ID with the same number, but with the hierarchical naming as
 
discussed in Modification 1 above, this is less likely to be a problem
 
(e.g. "2005" could have the URI "dates/2005", which would not
 
conflict). Additionally, a site admin might decide to have a rigid
 
format for article ID URIs, e.g. "at least 6 digits, leading zeros if
 
needed" would eliminate the conflict with year-named articles even if
 
they were in the "root", as would having a short prefix such as "n" in
 
front of all article-ID URIs ("sitename.com/n3415").
 
Thus, links to existing articles could be of the form
 
<nowiki>[[article name|link text]]</nowiki> or
 
<nowiki>[[0000|link text]]</nowiki>. Perhaps the wiki
 
software would even expand the latter form to include the article name,
 
for human reference: <nowiki>[[3415 Article Name|link text]]
 
</nowiki>.
 

Revision as of 16:51, 13 October 2005

Computing: Software: Ideas: Subwikis

"Subwiki" is kind of a working label used to describe a set of features for which there seems to be a need in wiki software but which, as of yet, does not seem to exist.

The Problem

One limitation which keeps showing up when attempting to use wiki software as a general content-management tool is that you often end up with areas of the wiki that are of particular interest to certain people but of relatively low interest to others — and, likewise, the people interested in a particular area may have relatively low interest in the rest of the wiki. (Let's call these people who are interested only in a certain area "special interest users", because they come up often.)

This leads to a few minor awkwardnesses:

  • Articles may have to be carefully named to indicate the context in which they belong, e.g. several neighborhood groups sharing a wiki might want to have articles entitled "Crime Watch", but only one of them can actually use that name; the others, at least, will need to add some clarifying context to the title, e.g. "Pinecrest Area Crime Watch". Ideally, all the articles should have this clarifying context, since each such article is primarily of interest to its respective neighborhood.
  • Navigational and look-and-feel issues:
    • The "main article" for the special interest doesn't serve well as a home page:
      • The logo is the main wiki's logo, and is not specific to the special interest
      • There is no way to customize the stylesheet or skin for articles in the special interest area
      • The navigation bar points to articles relating to the main wiki, rather than to articles relating to the special interest
    • The special interest user may tend to wander out of the pages related to their special interest and get lost, as all the navbar links will point (as they do for the special interest "main article") to articles relating more to the main wiki than to their special interest
    • Extra effort has to be expended to provide any kind of aid to navigation within the special interest area, or indeed even minimal links "back home" to the special interest "main article". Although this can be done reasonably well with templates, it adds an extra layer of effort required in order to maintain the special interest area and it adds extra clutter to pages within the special interest area.
  • Special interest users entering the wiki from the main site may be puzzled as to how to find the set of articles which interests them, unless they have been given the URL of the main article for that interest-area (e.g. http://htyp.org/index.php/Pinecrest_Road_Neighborhood) — which itself is an awkwardness, as long URLs are not only difficult to remember and type, but also difficult to fit conveniently onto tear-off sheets or business cards.
    • URL Alternative 1: use TinyURL to generate a short URL, and publish that. Disadvantage: The URL gives no clue as to the nature of the site; people do look at things like the domain name to get an idea of whether the site is worth visiting or not.
    • URL Alternative 2: create a subdomain (e.g. pinecrest.htyp.org), and have traffic redirected from there to the actual URL of the special interest homepage. Disadvantage: Although this does solve the URL issue, it does not address the other issues.

Alternatives

In addition to the specific alternatives above (which solve only one issue), the other obvious alternative which solves all of the above problems is simply to create separate wikis for each special interest. The disadvantages to this are as follows:

  • Requires webmaster intervention: a new database must be added to MySQL for each new wiki, or at the very least the wiki creator has to have the ability to add new tables and must take care to choose a non-conflicting prefix
  • No searching across subwikis: Some users may be interested in several related special interest areas. For example, a user searching for information about setting up scanners under Linux might want to search the "Linux" and "Computer Hardware" areas for articles
  • No sharing of users: Requiring users to create accounts for each area of interest makes it less rewarding to create an account in any of them (since the benefit of registration is limited to the wiki in which you registered) and thus encourages users to maintain a narrow focus and generally puts unwanted barriers between interests and reduces overall interaction. (Note: the MediaWiki development team are working on solutions to share users between wikis, which would address this one issue.)
  • No easy way to move articles between special interests: sometimes a special interest area starts as a single article, or a group of articles which are later seen to be related. Moving articles between wikis while preserving their histories and their links to other articles is doable but tedious.

Proposal

Some proposed modifications to the existing MediaWiki standard

The prime area of concern is that users should be able to dive into specific subject areas on a wiki without worrying about naming conflicts or contextual miscues (subwikis being more or less an automatic by-product of this functionality).

Given the extent of the modifications, it may actually be a better idea to start from scratch than to attempt to shoehorn MediaWiki into a role for which it was perhaps never intended. Nonetheless, it may be easier to start out by thinking of the design in terms of modifications to a known model.

For all the following modifications, I am proposing unlinking the URI from the article name; in other words the URI will be stored separately from the article's displayed title, so they don't need to be the same.

Modification 1

Automatic hierarchical topic-spaces with magic delimiter character (we'll use "/" so that to avoid conflict with MW "namespaces")

  • An article with the URI "whatever/example/something/stuff" is shown with the title "stuff" but shown as belonging to the category "something" (e.g. with a linkback, though this should probably be definable by skin/stylesheet) which belongs to "example" etc.
  • Internal links on the "whatever/example/something/stuff" page are relative to the current URI -- a syntax suggestion (others are possible):
    • [[things]] refers to the URI "whatever/example/something/stuff/things", i.e. a sub-article
    • [[/things]] refers to "whatever/example/something/things", i.e. an article at the same level
    • [[//things]] refers to "whatever/example/things", i.e. a parent-level article (aunt/uncle)
    • [[////things]] refers to "things", i.e. a root-level article
  • The root wiki is treated as another wiki named "@", with an automatic interwiki link in the format "@:URI", e.g. "@:whatever/example" would link to "whatever/example"

For longer article titles, the article's URI-name should probably be a shortened version of the title, taking the URI context into account. For instance, "Linux setup and configuration" could have the URI "tech/linux/setup". Under this scheme, a "sub wiki" becomes almost trivial in that you could have a separate domain (e.g. linux.tech.hypertwiki.org) -- go straight to a given URI (e.g. tech/linux) and it would appear more or less as if the "Linux" page were the homepage of a completely separate wiki. Links to Linux-relevant articles would not have to be carefully named so as to include "Linux" in the title, as they would now.

This would probably also largely remove the need for the "category" system, though there should be some way of displaying all sub-articles. A navbar at the left is what comes to my mind, showing at least the current topic (e.g. "Linux") and a list of short-URI sub-article names, with links, and maybe an "expand" link to show the full tree back to the root (perhaps a "root wiki" link for subwikis, to show the current subwiki's location within the master wiki as well). Other automatic links that might be helpful would be "full tree" (all articles under this one, shown as a tree) and "index" (alphabetic index of all articles at any level under the current context).

Modification 1a

The hierarchy need not even be a tree or even necessarily acyclic in order for this to work. For instance, if we have an article about Durham, NC -- which is part of North Carolina, but also part of the NC Triangle Area and part of Durham County, NC -- we could have the URI "earth/us/nc/durham", but also "earth/us/nc/triangle/" which contains a link to [[durham]] (URI "earth/us/nc/triangle/durham") and "earth/us/nc/durham county/durham" (same). The Durham NC article itself would declare its parents (via a category-like syntax) to be "earth/us/nc", earth/us/nc/triangle", and "earth/us/nc/durham county" (e.g. "[[parent:earth/us/nc]]" -- though this might actually work better using the article ID scheme in option 2).

The main change here, then, would be the addition of "parent"-declaration syntax and corresponding changes in the database (i.e. any article may have an arbitrary number of children and an arbitrary number of parents, as opposed to an arbitrary number of children and only one parent).

Modification 2

Primary linking by article ID Although I think we should continue to support linking by article name – as this makes it easier to "request" articles, to create requested articles, and to keep track of article requests – perhaps the primary means of referencing other articles should be by using their ID in the database. This would largely negate the need for internal "redirects" and link updates when an article's name changes. It would not remove the need for disambiguation" pages, but it would reduce the number of times when a disambiguation page was arrived at instead of the intended article.

I would also propose that an article's URI could make use of either the article's ID or title; whether these were kept in separate URI folders (e.g. "sitename.com/a/article_name" vs. "sitename.com/n/3415") would be up to the administrator of each wiki site, in much the same way it is currently their decision to have the wiki located under (e.g.) "/wiki" or "w/" or to just put it in the root folder (as in this wiki). Having them in the same folder would mean that an article's URI could not be just a number (e.g. "2005") because there might be an article ID with the same number, but with the hierarchical naming as discussed in Modification 1 above, this is less likely to be a problem (e.g. "2005" could have the URI "dates/2005", which would not conflict). Additionally, a site admin might decide to have a rigid format for article ID URIs, e.g. "at least 6 digits, leading zeros if needed" would eliminate the conflict with year-named articles even if they were in the "root", as would having a short prefix such as "n" in front of all article-ID URIs ("sitename.com/n3415").

Thus, links to existing articles could be of the form [[article name|link text]] or [[0000|link text]]. Perhaps the wiki software would even expand the latter form to include the article name, for human reference: [[3415 Article Name|link text]] .

Related Articles