On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Steven Walling <steven.walling(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Quim, I think even this first iteration is problematic
on a bunch of
fronts. 3 months as a first iteration to build several major features as
the basic proof of concept should be a sign that you're biting off too much
in terms of scope.
I think this is somewhat exaggerated. Almost all of the things proposed can
likely be done by defining a set of semantic properties, modifying existing
templates, then adding queries into templates that can be added back into
the same templates we're already using on other pages. Defining forms is
also relatively simple for all of this. I doubt much or any of this will
requirement any development work.
If we hire someone that already has a lot of SMW experience, this is likely
a pretty easy target.
I also think it's deeply problematic that you
don't seem to have shaped the
proposal based on the expressed needs of people who have tried to use the
current system and failed, and that you're seemingly ignoring the use case
of all the many different kinds of contributors by focusing a comprehensive
restructure solely for new contributors. When we make something like Echo,
we're doing it first and foremost to attract new people, but we can't get
away with ignoring the needs of existing users.
We have a current system?
In general, I don't think you've fully
considered how the current set up
might serve our needs with less heavy-handed changes than migrating to
Semantic MediaWiki, and I'm wary of supporting a restructuring of
documentation systems I depend of every day based on a grand plan of any
kind.
Almost all of the changes Quim is suggesting will likely be completely
transparent to you and your normal processes. Semantic annotations are
almost always added to templates and users have no clue that magic is
happening behind them.
- Ryan