Talk:Tectonic shift think tank/Archive

live broadcast?
We're part of the UNICEF wiki team and are interested in hearing/viewing the conference remotely. Will it be available as streamed audio or a/v anywhere? thanks! - Terra Weikel, UNICEF


 * Welcome UNICEF! - I'm afraid that due to funding and technical constraints - We do not have the capability to audio stream for this event ..;-(. However, everything we do will be on the wiki. --Mackiwg 04:51, 10 April 2007 (CEST)


 * It's possible that we could set up a Skypecast. Can you leave an email address, Terra in case we do we can contact you. brent 05:22, 10 April 2007 (CEST)


 * I'd also like viewing (or hearing) this conference, though not necessarily live. If someone could set up a an audio recorder or video camera, maybe the resulting file(s) could be distributed via BitTorrent (to prevent traffic issues for the host)!? -- FND 09:01, 10 April 2007 (CEST)


 * We can send a video camera with merrick; let's use skypecast if possible, we would definitely be able to participate from NY HQ christopher - cfabian at unicef dot org


 * If anyone's keen on setting up a skypecast then please feel free to do so. We're starting at 9am Vancouver time. brent 05:53, 11 April 2007 (CEST)


 * Skypecast has been set up for day 2. Dial: +99001110018675026 to join --Leighblackall 19:21, 12 April 2007 (CEST)


 * Unfortunately, I won't be able to listen in live; could anyone record this please? (PS: Just out of curiosity - why only on day 2?) -- FND 19:45, 12 April 2007 (CEST)

educational content
I was doing my daily research routine and came across this post; http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/archives/002851.html I think we should also consider how we should be delivering educational content. How could people embed wikieducator content into their learning environments in a dynamic (youtube) kind of way?

brain teaser
Suggested brain teaser #1: "what is WikiEducator?" This has seriously teased my brain for some time now :) Qedoc 12:01, 27 March 2007 (CEST)

update (people)
I added a couple of people I met at the Hewlett meeting in Houston; will discuss with Wayne later.--Eloquence 23:50, 27 March 2007 (CEST)

NC-sectarianism
Quote from bottom: Add your link to a vision for Mediawiki software futures for Wikis serving educational needs here

It would be very tempting to add http://www.qedoc.org here, but the danger is that rather than discussion going in interesting areas such as the use of categories, templates and metadata in the organisation of educational MediaWiki, the integration of interactive learning materials into MediaWiki or other constructive things, the discussion would instead devolve into NC-sectarianism. McCormack 08:04, 28 March 2007 (CEST)


 * You're right, there are far more interesting things to talk about than 'quizzing systems'. brent 12:57, 29 March 2007 (CEST)


 * Ow. That really hurt. McCormack 19:19, 31 March 2007 (CEST)

WikiGUI
In response to Erik's mail to the MediaWiki-l list:

I have a few thoughts on a possible graphical interface for editing wiki text:
 * There are two major benefits of a GUI:
 * 1) On the one hand, it makes participation much easier for less-experienced users. Also, a GUI might make the whole concept less arcane and intimidating, thus helping the user to accept the idea of a wiki in the first place.
 * 2) On the other hand, though, there are also considerable advantages for advanced users. Editing a long or complex wiki page in a plain-text edit box is often a strain because there are few visual clues to serve as an anchor (it's what Germans might call a Textwüste; a letter salad or wasteland of text, easy to get lost in). A GUI with properly highlighted textual elements (headings, emphasis etc.) would mostly solve this problem, thus possibly even helping to improve the quality of the wiki contents.
 * When it comes to GUI editors, there are two options: The often-discussed WYSIWYG (or WYSIWYM), but also syntax highlighting. However, Wiki Markup Highlighting should not be limited to using colors on a monotext font (as known from programming IDEs) - instead, it should also incorporate font size (for headings), margins etc. - so basically, it would be WYSIWYM without stripping the wiki markup. Personally, I'd prefer this blend of syntax highlighting and WYSIWYM because it has most of the advantages of WYSIWYG, but it doesn't make advanced users feel like their ceding control. Also, syntax highlighting would teach less-experienced users how to properly use the wiki markup (they'd just need to look at the page source, and it'd be immediately obvious).

Not sure if this is the kind of input you were looking for, but I felt that these issues are often overlooked...

-- FND 09:34, 10 April 2007 (CEST)


 * I like the way the MoinMoin wiki engine has WYSIWYG editing built in but you get a option if you want traditional or GUI. You can choose at the time of editing if you like, or in your user prefs. MediaWiki could learn a lot from MoinMoin. brent 05:55, 11 April 2007 (CEST)

Here's a good example of why WikiGUI is important (taken from a thread on MediaWiki-l): [Imagine a] distributed, longtime project which is documented using [MediaWiki]. A 'manager' supervising the project two hours a week detects something he does not like in the docu. He wants to be able to use 'huge fonts' in the color 'red' for comments and finally to be able to format some parts of text as bulleted list (they like these). There is absolutely NO way to make this person [learn/use wiki markup] if he isn`t one of the the already convinced techstaff. -- FND 11:53, 11 April 2007 (CEST)

Peter Blaise says: Plan B - why not a non-Wiki solution form one of the many free toolbar vendors? Today, I often cut and paste the article back and forth with my own text editor. Word2Wiki seems effective as a macro to prep Word documents for pasting into MediaWikis. So on the one hand, I'm also looking for a WYSIWYG Wiki editor INSIDE my Wiki. Either way, I use Google spell check my own and other people's contributions ... wait a minute: maybe Google or some other free toolbar maker can include a Wiki-check along with spell-check? In other words, if we think outside the box ... My Wiki NEEDS copious links and they're not going to be the simple link name, so a smart editor is essential. Google could even check links live as we edit (see http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=1&hl=en for an example of live searching as you type). Hello, Google?