Wiki front page layout options - seeking opinions


#1

Looking to improve the Wiki front page layout and decided to ask for opinions.

So here’s a poll. You can choose only one option. Options 1 and 2 are about different ways of using the two column layout. Choose option 3 if you think we should ditch the 2 col layout, but if you go for that please post a reply saying what you’d like to see instead.

  • Use one column for news/general interest and the other for technical items
  • Keep the current “mixed” use of columns
  • Drop the two col layout and do something else (pls say what below)

0 voters


#2

Well the result is looking clear so far, despite quite a low turnout!

I’ll let it run for another day or so before acting but I must admit it’s going the way I wanted…


#3

Really like how the wiki has come together so far, but layout wise, it’s a bit outdated.

Okay, so… i voted for do something else (eventually). I think the wiki could benefit a lot by using a gitbook.com layout, it supports markup language out of the box, which will be handy when you intend to put up info on creating smart contracts, and anything programming related (there will be a huge demand for technical documentation to be added to the wiki as cardano evolves).

It also has a very clean, beautiful and minimal design to it, and gives a more professional feel to a website.

Gitbook has a free tier, and would allow you to mirror the content of a repository, which means you would more control over what is being added, personally i think it will create more engagement as well.

PS: i know Microsoft might f*ck up github so i’m unsure if this is a good route to take…


#4

Just for context, I’m not saying anything :slight_smile: But gitbook does support i18n - https://www.npmjs.com/package/gitbook-plugin-i18n


#5

I quite like the existing “older look” layout - people like something familiar.

However, I do *really * like the gitbook design and look - very clean, modern and easy to read / navigate :slight_smile:


#6

I like that gitbook idea as well, would be nice to try it? The downside is max 2 free users


#7

Agreed, the free tier is kind of lacking in that respect. (Maybe CF is willing to sponsor a bit, looking at you Jon… :wink::grin:)

Alternatively, after reading This howto guide for using git with gitbook, it got me wondering if its possible to create a seperate repo and let everyone push commits to it.

The 2 persons with the gitbook account can clone the repository and add it to the linked gitbook repository and push.

Maybe we could do a test when you have some time, i’m keen to find out if this works, for research purposes ofcourse…


#8

Me!? :joy:

Worth exploring if there was an agreement to go this direction. Don’t get me wrong, I like the traditional Wiki style too :slight_smile:


#9

Yes, that may have been a premature question. :sweat_smile:. But maybe some modernism is really what you need in your life right now Jon :blush:.

There is not a lot of traditionalism present on the forum, we are financial pioneers since we are supporting blockchain technology, more than that, we are supporting the first scientifically built and peer reviewed blockchain technology.

Soo… free gitbook accounts for everyone? :joy:


#10

Well that was interesting – wasn’t expecting anyone to suggest dropping MediaWiki altogether! :open_mouth:

I do like clean, minimalist design myself. However, I’ve been seriously considering stepping back for a while now, and this would be a sensible time to do it. This is perfectly genuine, I’ve mentioned it already to some of the regulars, I’m not resentful that things are going in a different direction, in fact it looks interesting, even exciting, but I’m looking more to non-techy stuff for excitement these days.

So I’m not dropping tools and running off, I’m happy for everything to continue as it is over the short term, but I won’t be investigating how a MediaWiki->gitbook migration would work, I’ll leave that to others.


#11

@RobJF Hey Robin, I’m not suggesting dropping it… far from it - just thinking out loud :slight_smile:

I know that a whole load of people really appreciate what you are doing so if we can help in anyway, please do say :slight_smile:


#12

I didn’t take it that way Jon, and thanks very much for these comments, but I’m afraid I will be stepping back from the wiki and all crypto related activities (except holding!), the only question is when. I officially retire this year and that has prompted a major rethink. So techy stuff is being minimised in favour of social (face to face), physical and creative activities. It’ll be a gradual process though, I’ll be around for a while yet! :smile:


#13

I’m very pleased to hear that! I know exactly what you mean about having a rethink on things - a balance is needed - I step firmly away from my Mac and mobile at weekends (I love cycling so that keeps me sane!) :slight_smile:


#14

I see GitBook Startup, normally $7/user/mnth, is free for open-source & non-profit teams.


#15

Missed that! Thanks Rob. I really like the current layout, but am just curious to see what value Gitbook could bring from a user experience standpoint. I took the liberty to contact them for that free plan for more than 2 users…Just to see if the wiki matches their criteria. Pretty sure it does. If it goes well, I say it could be worth a shot to at least explore it?


#16

Absolutely! But maybe you missed the bit above where I said I wouldn’t work on this.

It looks like I’m saying “if you guys do this I’m off” but I really don’t want to give that impression, because I think it could be a great move and I’m going anyway. So I’ve decided to bring that forward and make it more of a clean break. I’ll obviously cooperate fully in helping others take over my side of it, but that’s all I’ll do regarding the wiki from now on. We can discuss the details on Slack.


#17

Indeed I read it. Sure let’s talk about it on Slack. Hope we’ll still see you around from time to time between your adventures!


#18

Thanks Pierre. I’m mindful that the wiki was your idea, and I was your first collaborator, so I’m sorry to break up that team, but exciting times lie ahead for all of us! :grinning:


#19

Well, the votes do indicate that people would like to keep the 2 collums. It was not my intention to stir up the pot by suggesting something new :pensive:.

I know you have been saying for a while that you would like to move away from the wiki, but im still hoping that you decide to stay or occasionally drop by, wikimedia or gitbook, or whatever course this takes.

You are one of the few people who put a great amount of effort into the wiki and you do an amazing job at it.


#20

I’d hate to think anyone felt they pushed me out, but I decided quite a few weeks ago that I’d go eventually, and if there’s to be any major change, that would be the natural point at which to part company.

Until then, although I feel a clean break might be better in some ways, it’s likely I’ll find reasons just to do a little more here and there for some time to come. (Yes, I keep changing my mind about this, seems I can’t help it!)

Thanks very much for your kind comments! :blush: