Topic on Gentoo Wiki:Feedback

From Gentoo Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Use of metadata abstract versus article description

3
Summary by Maffblaster

Article description property to be used over metadata abstract.

SwifT (Talkcontribs)

Maffblaster and I had a small talk on it on IRC, but didn't finish it yet. Right now, Maffblaster is looking into a more flexible way of referring to other articles on the wiki (through the See Also sections). This method takes an article-provided paragraph as part of this source.

Now, the suggested paragraph is a new parameter (Article description) which provides a single-sentence description of the article. However, we already have the means to provide this (through the metadata abstract).

I would rather not introduce another parameter, but instead use the abstract one (which has existed for a longer time). The feedback Maffblaster (correctly) gave was that the abstract one often uses longer paragraphs, whereas the suggested parameter would use a single sentence.

I don't think there is really a need to differentiate on this. We can easily update the abstracts of articles to have smaller paragraphs, nor can we enforce that the other parameter would use a single sentence.

The reason why I prefer to keep it to a single one is to ensure that the number of non-visible parameter fields that we want to put in the article is properly managed, and that editors don't get the impression they have to provide the same information twice, trice, etc.

Maffblaster (Talkcontribs)

Another point I would make is the naming terminology used for {{Metadata}}. It is non-descriptive of its exact purpose, which is why I was motivated in creating the new {{Article description}} template (and associated Property:Article_description text property).

The term "Metadata" could mean a variety of things based on the context. There are a lot more potential data points (that I would eventually, potentially like to harness) in our articles, and they will need additional templates and properties in order to make it possible for automation and flexibility.

I certainly agree that it is good to open a discussion about this, as my experiments in this area have opened my eyes to the possibility of connecting (a lot) more data directly from the Portage API. The list of available software in Display manager is a good example. It would be nice to have a Package template/property and potentially a homepage template/property (linked to InfoBox homepage data?). This data would be called in the Meta articles to list the instructional articles presently available for each software package.

There are a lot of possibilities here, and it is definitely a dream of mine to have our wiki automatically associating our (excellent and always improving) documentation directly with packages and then exposing this to the end-users in a viable way (presently some ebuilds provide the URLs to the appropriate articles here on the wiki.

As far as I tell, the intended purpose of SMW is to make adjusting lists, generating charts, and graphics automated and maintainable.. I'm totally fine with adding additional data points to the wiki (such as semi-automagic generation of the Meta style articles)., as it would ease the burden on our editors and allow to have a standard of consistency across the wiki (for things like the See also sections of articles).

Another (somewhat weak) point: SMW (upstream) uses a property named "Description" for the same purpose I'm using "Article description." Only difference here is that "Article description" is more exact. https://www.semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Property:Description

Please also review this SMW example of data point being defined and exposed for references in other articles: https://www.semantic-mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Demo:Berlin&action=edit

SwifT (Talkcontribs)

Given that there's no other feedback of yet, I'll go with the suggested article description (especially since Maffblaster is much more active than me ;-) and approve those changes for translation as well then.