Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
zero wrote:
For complete newbies, no, but for anyone who’s used it 3 or 4 times, the numbers are a cinch and I think they are worth sticking with.
But initially, you have to be able to make the users read/click those odd numbers 3 or 4 times. Also, I’m with ruud: reading documention is faster when you can pick what you want to read.
Remember that there are more technical, faster to learn and smarter persons like experienced programmers that possibly start using TXP as the motor of their personal chocobo blog. They know how to write code, how to install things and how to learn to use things, but they don’t know all the tags or opportunities or where they can find them. Therefor, more descripting names are really fucking good not actually bad.
Btw, how many would even use textbook many many many times? It’s just docs.
So 101 etc is great because everyone knows it in every language.
Do we? :D Then my friend and a random dog are stupid…
Last edited by Gocom (2008-08-04 20:11:15)
Offline
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
Yes, let’s get some facts straight, Destry, now you’re calling me shifty and other things.
Since your return you’ve made it clear where you stand, I’ll give you that. As you say here and here and in more recent posts, you will design Textbook your way whether we like it or not. Take it or leave it or you will walk away. Clearly not interested in what is best for Textpattern but solely concerned with laying your concepts on us or nothing at all. And do you like laying your views on us! You certainly don’t mind spending your time if it’s to expound your views! (Another example)
“I don’t think I could be more straightforward without looking you in the eye. The fact you think I’m not is pretty funny to say the least” and “I’m not reading into your words” you say. Oh really? I first noticed the opposite here. In the comment before it I had made a general statement but you chose to twist it and imply I was making assumptions about your words, when I did no such thing. There’s the snide remark slipped in about subjective opinions too – you like those little snide remarks don’t you? But I ignore that and put it down to your possible tiredness or something. But I start to wonder with this comment where you do NOT hear the overlap between me and Stuart. Again there’s a dig about my not-sensible (but sensible to me) suggestion. Then you say I am already putting target words on the table like cms or blog, but I never said that, except in a different context. Just small things which can be ignored if they are out of character. But are they?
You start the textbook architecture thread asking about Reorg and Reorg Temp on Textbook. “I’m not sure what the objective difference is. Which one should be focused on?” you say. If you had read them you would have known. Those were my first attempts to organize existing Textbook articles and with you being the IA expert and all, I thought you might have been interested. But instead of discussing those on Textbook, you just mention them on the forum and then your first post becomes another exposition of your knowledge of MW. In my reply to your question I answer your question and try to open up the discussion and you answer some of it. But you completely ignore what I’ve done on Reorg, which is crucial to get right. So I could only conclude that you have your ideas and don’t want to discuss them (which is reinforced by your response to this very thread we are in now – you’re not letting us know what you are doing are you?)
But back to textbook architecture and my next comment where I clearly state my opposition to a left sidebar. Your response is interesting! I say … “Are you saying there has to be a sidebar?” You say…. “From a technical standpoint, no, there does not have to be a sidebar. From a logical standpoint, yes, there should be a side bar, and I agree with you that it should be simplified to only the main categories representing the first-level Txp user content.” See how you put words in my mouth? I said if there has to be a sidebar , you say there hasn’t but you expect me to accept there has to be from a logical standpoint, and then make out that I am with you on having a left sidebar for main categories. You then say a couple of times there will be a left sidebar, thus effectively dissing my opposition to it. You then say you have ‘a pretty good vision now of the home page layout’. So there you are again, implying quite clearly, you are going to do it your way and any opposing views will be brushed aside.
In my reply I try to elicit what you understand by categories and which direction you are taking your design. You said one thing then another so I wanted to know what did you really mean? I also give suggestions as to these categories, to see if I can get a real answer to a real question from you. In response, you do not answer directly but imply I need educating and give several links. You slag off my concerns about content being buried with one word replies and then say you don’t want to discuss ad nauseum.
So, it’s OK for you to write many long posts but not OK for others to discuss opposing views? That is too ad nauseum for you but it’s OK for you to bore the pants off us with your views? It’s OK for you to spout stuff you’re going to do, but you’re not going to get your hands dirty and show us anything real or practical until it’s a done deal? It’s OK for you to come back after 2 years, play the IA and design expert and suggest my main usefulness will be cleaning up the content of Textbook, most of which is your mess?
I have come across several people during my life who do not give straightforward answers to straightforward questions, who read their own meaning into what I say, who accuse me of being the things they are themselves. I have learned to avoid them or risk being manipulated into things I would rather not do. You are another such person. Prove me wrong with your actions!
And to answer your statements above:
1. Everyone should now see why I did it that way and who is the shifty and disrespectful one.
2. My mistake, I thought you designed it too.
3. You should take that back now.
4. I am quite ready to be shown how great MW can be, although to get a quick wiki up, DW served my purpose perfectly.
5. Confucius he say: He who smelt it, dwelt it
I hope to hear your practical suggestions to practical problems posed in this thread such as namespaces. I look forward to seeing your MW redesign complete with left sidebar and WP influence. I do not look forward to waiting at least another month to see any of it, however. You’ve gotta do what you gotta do but I hope you might let the community behind your closed-doors project of the public Textbook. We can compete and co-operate at the same time if you do that to produce something excellent – much fairer than dumping a fate accomplice (sp?) on us all, or don’t you agree?
Last edited by zero (2008-08-05 16:23:36)
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
I’ve made some changes again. Is it OK now?
Ruud, I only realised after I had replied to your post that Tags could be seen as part of 201. I hadn’t previously noticed that with Tag not having a number, someone could see it that way. So I’ve moved it after the others. I don’t think it fits well above Admin tabs and there’s already a link to it from the top menu so no need to scroll.
Last edited by zero (2008-08-05 16:40:58)
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
Destry> Thanks so much for putting all your time and effort into textbook. I use it a great deal for the tag reference. Thanks is overdue
Zero> You’re putting a great deal of time and effort into the community, Thanks.
Guys> I don’t think anyone is as interested in this drama as you guys. In fact I respect my time more than to read he-said/she-said epistles. Cost to benefit is really low. Fact is you’ll get more work done and it’ll benefit the community more if you can work together. Personally I’m for a cohesive looking integrated reference section for TXP. That means everything looking like it belongs and not like satellite sites on the end of octopus legs. Other communities handle this pretty well, so we can too. That is just my opinion.
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
I don’t really want to get into this whole back and forth but here are a couple of points from my perspective.
- Bert’s efforts were not a TxB replacement. They are docs for xPattern. It just happens that right now it’s all pretty similar.
- My motivations for looking at dokuwiki before really grounded on update frequency. MW updates way too frequently for my limited schedule to keep up.
- While I am happy to keep things running with TxB, my textpattern time has become smaller and smaller lately. I haven’t released a new plugin in forever, and the last update to one of mine was over a year ago, so if someone with more time wants to take over the documentation train I’m ok with that.
Anyway. In the end of the day I don’t care what houses the docs. MW had the advantage of not requiring any transition, but if we are starting fresh…
Shoving is the answer – pusher robot
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
zero wrote:
you will design Textbook your way whether we like it or not. Take it or leave it or you will walk away. Clearly not interested in what is best for Textpattern but solely concerned with laying your concepts on us or nothing at all. And do you like laying your views on us!
Who is us and we? Count me out atleast, I love the fact that Destry does something really really useful and doesn’t pop out from nowhere, like some of us do, an alone wolf. PS. Wii is wii not we, if you got somesort of Wii-addiction like some of us do ;)
You start the textbook architecture thread asking about Reorg and Reorg Temp on Textbook. “I’m not sure what the objective difference is. Which one should be focused on?” you say. If you had read them you would have known. Those were my first attempts to organize existing Textbook articles and with you being the IA expert and all
O’rly? I see multiple topic scrattered around. Quite hard to spot everything, when there is multiple “zero Textbook templates/raws”-topics. Dude, limit a little.
You say… I say… You say… I say…
When does community say something? Are you alone? Community is same as a one person? But anyway, you did say, word against word. But then, you say “we are left behind”. Er what? We, you, me them? Decide, please.
It’s OK for you to come back after 2 years, play the IA and design expert and suggest my main usefulness will be cleaning up the content of Textbook, most of which is your mess?
Destry didn’t make the template and community did make the content too, right? So, when did Destry do all that shit your talkin’ about?
Everyone should now see why I did it that way and who is the shifty and disrespectful one.
Nope.
I do not look forward to waiting at least another month to see any of it, however. You’ve gotta do what you gotta do but I hope you might let the community behind your closed-doors project of the public Textbook. We can compete and co-operate at the same time if you do that to produce something excellent…
Didn’t you start that Textbook thing same way? You talk and then secretly decide that changing platform is the best choise… geez.
Btw, nothing personal, I just want to stop your Destry blaming, dear Peter. If you want, you can start blaming me, but neither I care if you blame me for something or email me “fucking asshole”-msg. It just makes me laugh as always :D
Zero and Destry, you’re both putting time and effort into the Textbook, thank you both.
Last edited by Gocom (2008-08-05 18:10:08)
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
mrdale wrote:
Guys> I don’t think anyone is as interested in this drama as you guys.
I find it very entertaining, though the posts are getting short story size, they do provide some sort of levity.
hakjoon wrote:
Bert’s efforts were not a TxB replacement.
My efforts were geared towards xPat, yes. I first concentrated on the tag reference, which I feel is the place most users go to.
Gocom wrote:
Wii is wii not we, if you got somesort of Wii-addiction like some of us do ;)
Which explains what I’ve been up to lately and haven’t finished the tag reference :)
We Love TXP . TXP Themes . TXP Tags . TXP Planet . TXP Make
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
You trying to wind me up, Jukka, or are you drunk? If you want to know the truth you would read carefully before writing. By the way, your English is getting worse or you are getting lazier when writing. It does you no good. OK, grandad’s lecture over.
Destry wants to create Textbook his way so that means his actions affect all of us, ie the whole community, or aren’t you going to use Textbook? I use ‘we’ and ‘I’ appropriately afaik and your comments don’t make it clear what you are referring to.
Destry has written much good stuff for which the community is eternally grateful, but even he will admit there’s a lot of crap mixed in with it. It’s me who has been sorting it out, so I know. However, I will reiterate what Dale said above and say thanks for what you have done, Destry, I do appreciate much of it. There would only be half the content without you.
You say I am Destry blaming, but I am only defending my actions which Destry has found uncohesive. There was no need for Destry to find fault, I gave him the chance to carry on his own merry way. I actually gave the community a choice of another Textbook or at least a prototype to work on. Otherwise, as you can see, the community would end up with Destry’s design and we really don’t have a clue if it will be any good or not. Destry’s actual work or product relating to the new textbook at this moment in time is zero, nil, nowt. He says he’s done this and that but none of us have seen it, so I am challenging him to quit talking and start doing. If his product ends up better than mine then the whole community has benefited. It seems he is taking up the challenge so I am pleased with that because I thought he might find an excuse to walk away before contributing anything but lots of words.
Meanwhile, my version is complete, apart for some txp:tags and some discussion to make it better (which might lead to it being completely different but que sera sera :-) People can use it and try it (apart from editing and registration) and decide what is good and bad about it, then improve it or go and help Destry improve his, if he lets them.
Patrick and Dale, it would be nice to work together with Destry but believe me, I have good reasons not to. I am the one who has been offended. Unfortunately you would have to read the whole of my comment and the links on there to verify what I say. The main thing about my comment as I see it, is for Destry to read it all, take it to heart and then do something about it. Then we can move forward, even if we won’t work together. And Patrick, moving dokuwiki over is a simple ftp and change some permissions. Which won’t take long although it would need to co-exist with the existing textbook for a while, so I don’t know if that causes problems. Then there’s syncing the registration with forum registration and I’ve no idea how long that would take.
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
hcgtv wrote:
Which explains what I’ve been up to lately and haven’t finished the tag reference :)
Yeah, I also like Wii. I don’t own it but I like and love it. But closest of my heart is Sony’s PS-series :) But don’t worry, the tag reference is rly good :P
zero wrote:
You trying to wind me up, Jukka, or are you drunk? If you want to know the truth you would read carefully before writing. By the way, your English is getting worse or you are getting lazier when writing. It does you no good. OK, grandad’s lecture over.
You got some serious problems? This is 3rd time you say that “your a drunk asshole speaking a bad london” in public. So what? I have always been this way, see. With fillers, slang, skipping articles. And I don’t care a damn shit about your old white ass opinion :D And speak the truth, I don’t see anything too worse in the way I speak. Maybe u’re just too old fart, dude. Yes, I’m not English like you and neither I’m educated like you ;)
Last edited by Gocom (2008-08-05 19:10:08)
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
zero wrote:
You trying to wind me up, Jukka, or are you drunk? If you want to know the truth you would read carefully before writing. By the way, your English is getting worse or you are getting lazier when writing. It does you no good.
I’ve “spiked” multiple posts in this thread, that I decided not to send because they would just add to the already excessive drama. But, IMHO, you need to be called out on the above.
Demeaning and entirely off-topic insults like those quoted, and others in this thread, create a desire in me to ignore all of your posts.
Including those that have some worth.
Ad hominem does that to many people.
Carry on as you wish. Hope my English was up to your standards.
Last edited by reid (2008-08-05 19:56:30)
TextPattern user since 04/04/04
Offline
Re: [wiki] A New Textbook
Short version: zero, Destry, you should work out your differences and work together on the next TxB version. There is no better option than that. Two different TxB are just a waste of resources, and duplicated content. But… with you both (and with the help of any one willing to collaborate) working on the same project, TxB will probably be a dream come true.
And also, it’s the happiest end we can desire for this thread!
Long version:
I hope all this will happily end soon, with the announce of zero and Destry working together on the new, official, improved, cleaner, easy-to-use, and easy-to-collaborate version of the Textbook. :)
Best of both worlds.
Destry, it may be time to take one deep breath, and apologize if you feel it.
zero, the sames goes for you. BTW, have you already read this article about TxB on Destry’s site?
zero, you were the one not-too-happy (well, me too :) ) about the xPattern fork, and you argued it wasn’t good to divide efforts. Doesn’t the same applies here?
In fact, dividing efforts on documenting a piece of software doesn’t seem useful at all.
You have done and do many things for TxP.
Destry also did many things, and he is willing to do and collaborate again.
None of you have to demonstrate that you are willing and capable of doing things.
So, going back to TxB:
Couldn’t it be zero’s Textbook an stepping stone to the next version of TxB running on MW?
zero has done some reorganization and cleaned out some of the crap.
Destry’s strengths seems to be related to IA, knowledge of MW inner mechanisms, knowledge of wikis, and of course, TxP (he may be a bit outdated regarding some new TxP features). Personally, I also like his designs. Wion is one of the most beautiful sites I’ve seen. And the articles are also great.
zero is the man that does. He created TXPQ, he created TxP templates, now he also created a new textbook.
He is well versed on writing, he knows and loves TxP. Personally, I don’t like his approachs to design (aesthetically speaking, and sorry for being so direct) but zero knows content is the king, and so he does: he create content for us to learn enjoy, being it an interview to a community member, and article about a new txp tag/plugin, or a whole documentation site. I envy this man, he seems to never be procrastinating. I think his secret-not-so-secret is related to breathing.
Offline