Ummmm not unless we add a list for Wikipedia/men...but
then we might get more lists of classifications than
we need! Besides, It's kind of fun watching people
figure out that I'm a person of the gyno-persuasion!
JHK
--- wikipedia-l-request(a)nupedia.com wrote:
Send Wikipedia-l mailing list submissions to
wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
visit
http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body
'help' to
wikipedia-l-request(a)nupedia.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
wikipedia-l-admin(a)nupedia.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikipedia-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Re: Incorrect HTML encoding--something
new? (lcrocker(a)nupedia.com)
2. More female Wikipedians (sgilbert(a)nbnet.nb.ca)
3. Press release tomorrow: Wikipedia Day! (Larry
Sanger)
4. Re: More female Wikipedians (Simon Kissane)
5. Re: Re: wiki source cvs (David Merrill)
--__--__--
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:35:17 -0800
From: lcrocker(a)nupedia.com
To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Incorrect HTML
encoding--something new?
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
This is a multi-part message in MIME format...
------------=_1011044117-15411-0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
The way theyare now (HTML4 Trans., ISO-8859-1) is
great. In the
future we can tweak the sotware if we need to
generate something
else, since the data is unambiguous.
I have no _particular_ opinions. All I want is
for
our pages to work
in all browsers. What should I do?
0
------------=_1011044117-15411-0--
--__--__--
Message: 2
From: sgilbert(a)nbnet.nb.ca
To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:13:20 -0400
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] More female Wikipedians
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
> > PS- Are there no other women taking
part in
this? I feel a bit like I've
> > snuck into the boys room. ;)
> :-) Ruth Ifcher is around (RoseParks
on
wikipedia) and Janet Davis
> writes a lot on the Wikipedia. I'm not
sure if
they are on the
> mailing list, though. Oh, and there's
also
PinkUnicorn.
Let's not forget JHK, --April, and Dreamyshade, to
name three of the more
hard-working females. There are quite a few
others, too. Wikipedia is
definitely male-dominated, though, which I agree
is regrettable.
Larry
There's also Claudine Chionh, H. Jonat and BF, since
we're
counting. :)
- Stephen Gilbert
--__--__--
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 22:34:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Larry Sanger <lsanger(a)nupedia.com>
To: <wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com>
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Press release tomorrow:
Wikipedia Day!
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
Hi all,
If all goes according to plan, the press release
should come out tomorrow,
which is "Wikipedia Day" (our first anniversary).
This might or might not
bring in lots of traffic. Be ready, Militia
members! Get into a
welcoming mood, Welcoming Committee members! :-)
Larry
--__--__--
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 22:29:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Kissane <sj_kissane(a)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] More female Wikipedians
To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
--- sgilbert(a)nbnet.nb.ca wrote:
[snip]
There's also Claudine Chionh, H. Jonat and
BF,
since
we're counting. :)
Maybe it's time
for [[Wikipedians/Female]]? :)
- Stephen Gilbert
Simon J Kissane
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
--__--__--
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 08:58:26 -0500
From: David Merrill <david(a)lupercalia.net>
To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wiki source cvs
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 04:50:53PM +0100, Robert
Bihlmeyer wrote:
Larry Sanger <lsanger(a)nupedia.com> writes:
> This, by the way, would be a great feature for
Wikipedia to be able to
> use; we'd certainly like Wikipedia
articles to
be convertable to DocBook
> XML format. That's what we decided we
wanted to
use as an XML DTD for
> Nupedia, and surely we'd want to use it
for
Wikipedia too.
I'm not convinced that DocBook is the best DTD for
this kind of
content. I like it very much for
(computer-oriented) technical
documentation, but for a more general topic? When
used to its full
extent DB is also quite baroque, and most of it
probably wouldn't be
used (for example the GUISUBMENU element
<g>).
Take a look at
<URL:http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/part2.html>
to get an overview
of DocBook elements.
A simpler, encylopedia-specific DTD may be better.
On the other hand,
I don't know of any off-the-shelf DTD that
fits
this description, and
a DocBook-subset may be better supported by other
software than any
DTD that's just used by Nupedia (and maybe
Wikipedia).
I agree that any complete-ish implementation of
DocBook would be very
hard and frought with difficulty. However, being
about to export into
basic docbook (meaning not much more than links,
sections, and <para>
tags) would allow the content to be worked into
DocBook based
publication systems and such, and also the
generation of pdf,
postscript, and other outputs. And *that* much at
least would be
fairly easy and worth doing imho.
--
David C. Merrill
http://www.lupercalia.net
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!