← Back to team overview

maria-docs team mailing list archive

Re: Stub content on KB?


Hi Daniel,

On 12/07/2011 02:30 PM, Daniel Bartholomew wrote:

Bryan>  I like the thought of stubs helping people to participate but as
Bryan>  many others have said, I'm very worried about it a) cluttering
Bryan>  up the KB and b) not actually helping.
Bryan>  A first step could just be a "Requested Articles" page, and add
Bryan>  a link to a "Want to contribute?" in the sidebar and at the
Bryan>  bottom of article listings.

I think the list of tasks on
...is a good start for a "Requested Articles" page. I'm fine with a
dedicated page if others like the idea.

Peppering "Want to contribute?" links around the site is a good idea
and they should link to the above "Contributing to the AskMonty
Knowledgebase" article.

Any other places for the link other then in the sidebar and at the bottom of the article list?

Daniel>  To keep track of them, we could add a checkbox to the edit
Daniel>  page to mark whether or not a page is considered a stub, and
Daniel>  then have a special page that lists all stubs.

Shaun>  Instead of a boolean flag for stubs, how about an enum field
Shaun>  for status? Stubs would be one status. This could help you
Shaun>  keep track of which pages you've thoroughly reviewed, for
Shaun>  example.

Bryan>  If we do add stubs, instead of adding another option to the
Bryan>  status field or a dedicated check box, I propose going forward
Bryan>  with adding tags to the KB. The multiple parents was seen by
Bryan>  some as a replacement for tags, but I think they can complement
Bryan>  each other and as an alternative way to find what you are
Bryan>  looking for.
Bryan>  Thoughts?

I know we've talked about tagging articles as being relevant for
specific releases, so am I correct in thinking in that instance the tag
would be something like "MariaDB 5.2.10" for something that only
applies to MariaDB 5.2.10 or "MariaDB 5.2" (if it applies to any 5.2
release)? (just trying to make sure I'm remembering our previous
discussions correctly)

The product / version tagging would be something different. It needs to be a lot more structured as it would actually tag certain sections of text, not just an article.

For things like stub articles, would we just adopt a convention of
adding a "stub" tag to articles which are stubs? I guess I'm just
wondering about the mechanics of how the tags would work in practice.

For example, would there be a pre-defined list that people can choose
from or will the tags be more free-form? Free form would be much
easier, I'm guessing, from an admin point of view, but we would need to
agree on a set of conventions (and maybe write them down somewhere) so
we don't end up with lots of very similar-but-not-quite-the-same tags.
And we should probably have a "tag review" tool that easily lets us
combine similar tags together.

These are questions that need to be hashed out. a pre-defined list is simple and cleaner but less flexible. I would probably start off with this and if needed allow free-form tags to be added. I am interested in what others think of this idea.

Best Regards,
Bryan Alsdorf, Lead Web Developer
Monty Program AB. http://montyprogram.com