|
BTW I feel that we too often tend to look at Wikipedia from authors' perspective. --Kpjas |
|
BTW I feel that we too often tend to look at Wikipedia from authors' perspective. --Kpjas First, I don't work for Bomis, Wikipedia, or related companies (or anyone else right now, for that matter—someone make me an offer (grin)), so this is strictly a grunt user opinion. Second, the comments I made in [/Proposed keyword search mechanism]? (about '$METADATA') were more of a "if you're gonna do it, this is what I'd prefer" type comment. So, that said, I think this is too much structure, too soon. Right now, the appeal of Wikipedia is its simplicity. I can just type—as little or as much as I want—and that's it. Other than learning the formatting conventions, I don't have to worry too much about whether I'm using the right "keywords", or pondering which category(s) something should be in. While I think most contributors could supply accurate metadata, I think some would be discouraged by the, perhaps implicit, obligation to do so. I've seen other projects get bogged down in the details like this to their detriment. The more I consider it, the more inclined I am toward keeping Wikipedia simple and structure free for as long as practical. The content and community are still evolving, and it's just becoming useful (cf Larry S's comments in Wikipedia Announcements); I don't think there's an urgent need to rein it in. --loh (2001-06-27) |
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)