suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

rsilletti · 2005-10-27 23:43:02

Given something manageable that I could subscribe to, I’d be happy to review and transfer tag usage examples when time permits.

maniqui · 2005-10-27 23:43:36

<blockquote>What about a more general forum for documentation? Something that covers more than just tags. Somewhere for people to post their discoveries, example code snippets, screenshots, step-by-steps, and so on.</blockquote>

Isnt this the purpose of actual “How do I…” forum?
A place where people post not only “how do I…?” question but also discoveries, tips, tricks, example code snippets, screenshots, step-by-step, etc.

If not, if Zem’s suggestion is about a more general forum…. won’t it become a new (and duplicate) “How do I…” forum?

I think about that when I was writting the first post of this thread. What else could be included in the threads?
But then I went back to the idea of a forum only about built-in txp tags.
The idea is to create some kind of “restricted (in the sense of topic scope)” forum.
Surely, it can also have one thread-per-tag, and also some few threads more, also related to built-in txp tags, like a thread to explain conditional tags, and the info posted there, when solid, can be moved to TextBook.

This is also a way to generate and discuss TextBook content before it is posted in the TextBook.

Right now, all the good examples, and ideas, and codes, and step-by-steps has been lost in various threads and forum categories.
I dont think someone will go thread by thread in the “How do I…” looking for good examples (and there are a lot of good examples, snippets, etc) to add them to the TextBook.

Last edited by maniqui (2005-10-27 23:45:06)

zem · 2005-10-27 23:59:54

If not, if Zem’s suggestion is about a more general forum…. won’t it become a new (and duplicate) “How do I…” forum?

“How do I?” is for questions requiring answers. “Documentation” would be for unsolicited answers. The moderators will make sure OT stuff gets forwarded back to HDI or Troubleshooting as appropriate.

maniqui · 2005-10-28 00:17:56

>The moderators will make sure OT stuff gets forwarded back to HDI or Troubleshooting as appropriate.

I have no doubt that moderators will put OT in the appropiate forum.
But that will lead to more efforts in keeping the forum in topic.

If the decission would be mine, I would start with a restricted forum with limited threads about built-in txp tag (thread-per-tag) to easily keep threads on topic. The original “Built-in TXP tags” or simple “TXP tags” forum.

Then, it can easily grows to “Documentation” if it is necessary.
I think it will be easiest to grow a restricted forum (“TXP tags”) into a more general one (“Documentation”), than try to moderate and keep in topic the threads of a new general forum.

Mary · 2005-10-28 01:21:25

I feel like Jean Luc: make it so. ;)

To start with, whom wants de powa (be a mod for that forum)? I need to know so I can ‘bless’ you. :) I should first ask Destry and Rick, would you guys like that or no (let me know via thread or email, doesn’t matter)? I’m feeling like we should have “wiki representation” about to help bridge the gaps. Would you like to be, then, maniqui?

thebombsite · 2005-10-28 01:28:55

And so it happens. Just a quick note having thouroughly enjoyed reading this thread – include new tags from SVN as they happen even though they may not be available in the current public download.

rsilletti · 2005-10-28 05:45:45

I’ve never moderated before, but I’d be willing to give it try.

maniqui · 2005-10-28 06:18:53

zem wrote:
<blockquote>What about a more general forum for documentation? Something that covers more than just tags. Somewhere for people to post their discoveries, example code snippets, screenshots, step-by-steps, and so on. […]

[…] “Documentation” would be for unsolicited answers. […]
</blockquote>

I think “Documentation” already exists: it is the TextBook.

Having a “Documentation” forum and also having the Textbook maybe will lead to duplicated content and duplicated efforts, and will be difficult to maintain.
Of course, it depends on how a “Documentation” forum is implemented and what will be the scope of that forum.

Documentation should be something more solid (solid regarding to the content) and less ambiguos, and a Wiki like TextBook offers more solidity to the content than a forum (well, I think that).
In real world, documentation usually goes in solid books/cd-roms/pdfs, and well, we also have our book, our Text Book for that.

Maybe, a “Documentation” forum can exists as a closed forum, where only those users that are deeply involved in TXP and the TextBook can enter and share ideas and optimize the maintainance of the TextBook.

I’m not very sure about what I’m saying. :|
(and read that as an example of the lack of solidity in forums).
<small>(“please, stop this guy, what is he talking about, he is just a TXP enthusiast, not a software developer, not a information architect, he even doesnt study at the university”)</small>

maniqui · 2005-10-28 06:46:14

This could be a possible “template” for the first post of each thread: <hr size=“1”/> <h2>Summary</h2> [A short summary about the tag] <ul> <li><a href=”“>tag page at TextBook</a></li> <li>since version: 1.2.3</li> <li>tag type: Single Tag</li> <li>tag context: page/form</li> <li>related info <ul> <li>link 1</li> <li>link 1</li> <li>link 3</li> </ul> </li> <li>suggested plug-ins that improve tag functionality <ul> <li>plug-in 1</li> <li>plug-in 2</li> <li>plug-in 3</li> </ul> </li> </ul>
<hr size=“1”/>

Yicks!
I have no-doubt that masters of TXP can easily improve or imagine a far better template that the one I’m suggesting.
I have tried to create the “template” based in the ideas I posted in the first post of this thread.
But i think it lacks of some information or maybe all the opposite: it has information that shouldnt be there.

Last edited by maniqui (2005-10-28 16:29:23)

zem · 2005-10-28 06:47:06

Maybe, a “Documentation” forum can exists as a closed forum, where only those users that are deeply involved in TXP and the TextBook can enter and share ideas and optimize the maintainance of the TextBook.

I think the main problem TextBook has is that there are too many barriers to posting: you need to ask for an account, and it doesn’t seem receptive to small contributions.

Seems to me that closed forums, or forums with hard and strict rules, would suffer the same problems.

Mary · 2005-10-28 06:49:08

> …“maybe will lead to duplicated content…”

Not likely at this stage of things.

Think of it as the wiki ‘incubator’. We already have the problem of people joining but not contributing to the wiki, and I guess its because the wiki scares them or something. A forum has the psychological effect of feeling open and friendly, which is what we want, that breeds contribution and plain good fun.

Don’t worry about keeping things on topic, the forums are actually pretty good about this, I’ve only had to move threads a few times, and I’ve yet had to close one. At the moment, permissions are lax, anyone can contribute. Mods are just about to be like… team motivators or something. They (the permissions, not the mods! lol, I just realized what that sounded like…) can be easily changed later in the unlikely event that things go nuts.

It just means that if you come across a thread that should be moved, you can do so yourself. Otherwise, any forum member can just hit ‘report’ and leave a brief little note about it, and another mod/admin can deal with it as appropriate. But I don’t anticipate any problems. Its all in good fun, and hopefully it’ll encourage some shy guys to contribute. :)

Last edited by Mary (2005-10-28 06:50:25)

maniqui · 2005-10-28 06:56:31

<blockquote>
I feel like Jean Luc: make it so. ;)

To start with, whom wants de powa (be a mod for that forum)? I need to know so I can ‘bless’ you. :) I should first ask Destry and Rick, would you guys like that or no (let me know via thread or email, doesn’t matter)? </blockquote>

Oh! When I read this one the first time (few minutes ago) I didnt understand it!
I followed the link and think it was an historical old thread (writed by Jean Luc ¿?) that has been deleted (I didnt notice that it is a forum category page, and not a thread deleted) (i’m falling asleep at this hours).
:D
<blockquote>
I’m feeling like we should have “wiki representation” about to help bridge the gaps. Would you like to be, then, maniqui?
</blockquote>

mary, I dont understand what you mean, I speak the language of Kusor!
But I will feel very happy if I can help.
And I know the pay worth the effort! Where do I put my signature?

ubernostrum · 2005-10-28 07:03:26

mary wrote:
> We already have the problem of people joining but not contributing to the wiki

/me hangs his head in shame.

I did correct an example a little while back, does that count? ;)

Mary · 2005-10-28 07:16:10

Sorry maniqui, Jean Luc = Just a really geeky and lame reference to Star Trek: that particular Captain always said “Make it So.”.

> “/me hangs his head in shame.
> I did correct an example a little while back, does that count? ;)”

Just say, “Shut up Mary, I’m busy,” and I’ll leave you alone. At least… until I remember that I have those socks I haven’t thrown yet today… LOL ;)

ubernostrum · 2005-10-28 07:28:23

How about “Go to hell, Mary!”

Or “up yer kilt!” I’ve known plenty of Canadians who wore kilts, maybe you could get one or force some young man of your acquaintance to do so.

Seriously, though, I need to spend some quality time this weekend looking over the wiki to see if there’s anything useful I can put up there. Life would be so much simpler if I didn’t have three different clients breathing down my neck to get changes made to their sites ASAP… :(

Last edited by ubernostrum (2005-10-28 07:30:25)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#16 2005-10-27 23:43:02

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#17 2005-10-27 23:43:36

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#18 2005-10-27 23:59:54

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#19 2005-10-28 00:17:56

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#20 2005-10-28 01:21:25

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#21 2005-10-28 01:28:55

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#22 2005-10-28 05:45:45

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#23 2005-10-28 06:18:53

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#24 2005-10-28 06:46:14

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#25 2005-10-28 06:47:06

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#26 2005-10-28 06:49:08

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#27 2005-10-28 06:56:31

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#28 2005-10-28 07:03:26

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#29 2005-10-28 07:16:10

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

#30 2005-10-28 07:28:23

Re: suggestion: new "Built-in TXP tags" forum category

Board footer