Topics That Die

Hmm. I've just been looking through the archives and came across TWikiXML. I was wondering what it is that draws a topic to conclusion.

Anyone got any comments? My observation is that in some cases it is a replier not answering a question.

Cheers, M.

-- MartinCleaver - 03 Jun 2001

I think with some of the topics in Codev, finalisation is dependant on production of code prototypes to actually complete the feature discussion.

Some features get pushed out faster than others for different reasons. For instance, the HowShouldTWikiBeModularized work is taking a while at present, and might be considered dead.

Anyway, I'd say that code production defines a topic as completed, but the flip-side is a little tricker to define.

-- NicholasLee - 04 Jun 2001

I wasn't really talking about having features implemented, although I can see that what I wrote could be construed that way.

I was thinking more of what happened in, say, WikiWordswithSpaces. In early revisions, people were talking about introducing a topic naming convention to allow spaces in WikiWords. The topic finished, not by resolving that issue, but by just saying that any reference to a non-existant topic would be highlighted using SPAN tags.

Later, new topics got created that re-introduced some of the concepts from WikiWordswithSpaces. For example, I thought of Peter's idea of beautifying Wiki words in CanIRenderWikiWordsSpacedOut.

Maybe I'm just starting to understand threaded mode. Hmm. I need to go off and think.

-- MartinCleaver - 09 Jun 2001

One thing I've noticed on TWiki.org that may explain this is that there are a lot of thread-mode pages that aren't indexed or refactored into more navigable pages. Other Wikis tend to indulge in a lot more refactoring or creating of index pages - maybe it's because the developers are too busy to do this, or maybe it's a cultural thing - TWiki encourages contributions to be signed more than some other Wiki clones, so perhaps that's a factor in pages staying more in thread mode.

Unless somebody organises old TWiki thread pages, or refactors them and makes them easy to find, it is very easy for feature discussions to be repeated.

-- RichardDonkin - 09 Jun 2001

Good point, we need more refactoring of content. Agreed, it is probably a cultural thing, but also a usability thing. Improved usability will promote refactoring and cross-linking. This can be achieved with better navigation (NavigationByTopicContext, WebMap) and PopupPageIndexForEditing (based on TopicListAndWebListVariable).

-- PeterThoeny - 09 Jun 2001

Perhaps we could add a statement like "please refactor whenever possible" on the WebEditTemplate (:^P) to encourage people to refactor? Also, maybe have a popup refactoring guide to show people what best practice is in this respect?

-- MartinCleaver 10 Jun 2001

This might work, though it is probably best to limit the number of links from the edit page; I suspect it's more about how to develop a suitable Wiki culture that promotes refactoring, and that technical solutions will only go a certain part of the way.

One Wiki where refactoring seems to work well is FoxWiki - see FoxWiki:MoreAboutHousekeeping - they also rely heavily on categories, putting a List Categories link on every page, which brings up a page where every link lists pages in that category. Much easier to navigate than the average Wiki. They use a category as a Wiki:WikiBadge to indicate which pages need refactoring - FoxWiki:CategoryNeedsRefactoring - though I'm not sure if that works well.

Renaming topics is another form of refactoring, of course - often the discussion means the initial topic name is no longer appropriate. This is in the TWikiAlphaRelease. [ Rename/move/delete is browser feature as of 01 Sep 2001 Production release. ]

Sub-pages, a la UseMod:SubPages (where the /FooBar pages are relative - only visible from the containing page) might be a good way of merging two topics together under a new topic with a new name - just put the original Wiki:ThreadMode pages as sub-topics of the new Wiki:DocumentMode topic. Sub-pages have been discussed on TWiki in MultiLevelWikiWebs.

-- RichardDonkin - 10 Jun 2001

This reminds me - I've often thought that TWiki should encourage multiple categories, even if has a primary category.

-- MartinCleaver - 10 Jun 2001

Re: multiple categories: How does TWiki not encourage them? http://www.opencountry.org/cgi-bin/view/Community/CategoryPages

-- PaulReiber - 24 Jun 2001

:^) I've just realised that I didn't answer because I didn't know how to answer. Consequently, TopicsThatDie, died. I effectively killed the topic for 4 months by going off-topic with my laziness in not starting a new topic for multiple categories and not querying what Paul meant. As time passed, I forgot that the topic even existed.

-- MartinCleaver - 19 Nov 2001

Wow. How appropriate. See RetainOriginalAuthor, another dead topic that I just added a comment to, that's pretty well echoed, and more or less validated, right here. This is the first time I'd read either... For "fun", I also went through both pages. Here, I adding the title, corrected a couple of typos, put in a bunch of COMMAS...tightened up a couple sentences, linked some words, updated a comment about an Alpha feature... - you'd have a hard time spotting changes in the diffs, since this was originally pretty clean, but little details add up...

There's more that can be done - lots of well-put basic statements, and example links, to use, for one. But the connection with RetainOriginalAuthor is good on its own.

-- MikeMannix - 01 Jan 2002

Sometimes topics die, sometimes they don't and are just resting. Killing off an old topic, unless it's really old seems like killing part of the community memory that's implicit in the wiki way imo.

Perhaps a better solution might be to create a means such that people can see topics that haven't been written to in a long time and/or perhaps this topic list things that seems to have come along might be a part of the solution if people get in the habbit of looking it over from time to time. Also, maybe an icon saying it's old might have some effect. Perhaps if a topic is going to be deleted then an icon or some other means of indicating it's removal is coming.

-- DavidLeBlanc - 02 Jan 2002

On the Codev WebForm, TopicStatus does some sorting, although existing pages have to be updated for it to be totally useful. Maybe adding a category or other search implementation for topics not modified in last 30-60-90+ days - kinda like on message boards in reverse ( see all topics for last 30 days, etc ), would make it easy to scan. Eliminating ClosedTopic in the search would refine even further.

-- MikeMannix - 03 Jan 2002