[pmwiki-users] PmW Mag?

Crisses crisses at kinhost.org
Tue Sep 19 13:15:51 CDT 2006

On Sep 19, 2006, at 1:21 PM, The Editor wrote:

> Hey, this is an exciting idea!  I love it.  PmMag could include
> articles such as
> 1) comparing and contrasting various, similar recipes
> 2) why I chose PmWiki, or case studies
> 3) best practices for things like farms, security, etc.
> 4) major new releases/code changes, why, what they do

Interviews of wiki sites:  why they chose PmWiki -- best & worst  
experiences with it -- will it fit their needs for the forseeable  
future -- would they use it again?
bios/interviews of wiki author(s) and cookbook authors -- how many  
sites are you running?  what made you choose PmWiki?  What made you  
contribute?  Are you working on any more contributions?

Definitely case studies:
Photo gallery
--look at the site, which recipes did you use, show off pages and  
explain how the code on the back works.

> I can see how such articles could be extremely useful to a new
> coder--if they were archived and searchable.  In fact these would
> probably be the best place to look to see if something recent has been
> written.
> Questions though:
> How would these articles be submitted?
> How would they be reviewed?
> Would they be editable like other wiki pages?

My opinion (TM?):

submit via wiki

review via discussion page

editable -- no -- the author can make editorial comments or revisions  
on the page later?  this reserves the individual rather than  
editorial "we" voice, and allows it to be more person(able) than most  
wiki pages are - i.e. the opposite of the Wikipedia WE.  Sheesh -- we  
can be OPINIONATED :)  with disclaimer (the views are the views of  
the author, not the PmWiki community or PM.)  [technically article  
pages could go either way -- the group can write/edit pages, and  
individuals can write/edit pages.  Why not?  I did that on  
Kinhost.org -- the main article/chapters of the "book" are editorial  
we.  People can contribute self-authored pieces from a private group  
to the pubilc manual by passwording the edit but adding the page with  
an author credit to the main table of contents.]

The author is responsible to correct typos and all opinions are  
correct as long as they're not abusive.  We could have a small  
privileged editing staff for correcting typos and making sure the  
pages don't have abusive contributions?

> The thing that makes a magazine useful is the editorial process.  It
> seems some sort of process would need to be developed whereby articles
> could be submitted, reviewed and discussed (on the mail list?), once a
> consensus version is drafted, published.  Then, they should be
> published in some sort of permanent form--though editing might be
> desirable for updating articles.

> One concern is adding all these task to Pm's already busy plate.
> Others would have to step up to the plate.

I think other than interviewing PM for the flagship issue (*Grins*)  
it's not on his plate at all.  We set up an area of the wiki -- a new  
group -- to start with.  We can use the Drafts recipe, maybe, or self- 
edit attr's of pages to deny reading, when ready, give out the read  
password for a review.  Review is on the associate Discussion page.   
When a sufficient #articles are ready, wikitrail/pagelist them  
together into a "bound" magazine -- PDF them if desired.

I'm up for interviewing someone, PM or being interviewed for an article.


More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list