My issue is not with the wiki, it is with having stuff in four places.
Perhaps there is a wiki solution either in different software or
a different configuration of Mediawiki that can consolidate it all.

Cary



On Wednesday, February 18, 2015, Andreas Orphanides <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Having been in the documentation-management mess before I don't think I can
> agree that it counts as bikeshedding, at least at the level we're currently
> discussing it. Given the amount of time that I spend in other settings
> trying to find a required piece of documentation over three (or four, or
> five) different internal or external knowledge repositories, I appreciate
> it when documentation management is well-considered ahead of time. So I'm
> all for this discussion!
>
> I would tend to agree that Google Docs is bad for long term doc management
> (in large part due to -- surprisingly from Google -- how bad it is at
> search and discovery). But for something like the Newcomer Dinner signups
> it's infinitely better than the wiki was, since it totally sidestepped the
> lockout problem. This is definitely something that falls into the "choose
> the right tool for the right job" problem space. But as Riley pointed out,
> I don't think it makes sense to maintain important docs there for anything
> but immediate group-editing purposes. For "hard" documentation I think the
> wiki is at least adequate, and certainly a better solution than GDocs.
>
> Which raises another question about electronic ephemera and whether we
> should/could archive "short-term" documents like this year's newcomer
> dinner signups somewhere besides GDocs for better discovery. I'm not an
> archivist so I'm not going to do anything but summon that head of the
> hydra.
>
> -dre.
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:42 PM, Riley Childs <[log in to unmask]
> <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > I would like to note that the documentation discussion here is prone to
> > bikesheading, if there are going to be docs I say just start them rather
> > then argue about X or Y. We have a wiki, lets use it (maybe get a few
> more
> > people on board to create accounts). We have a significant amount of
> > documentation there, rather then reinvent the wheel lets just go with the
> > wiki. At this point lets focus on the content rather then "accessibility"
> > or "display", because who cares about that if there is no content to
> begin
> > with and as long as structure is maintained we can do that stuff later.
> >
> > Google Docs are horrid as a long term documentation solution, stay far
> > away (we committed to using GDocs to do IT documentation, and that was a
> > mistake).
> >
> > //Riley
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> >
> > --
> > Riley Childs
> > Senior
> > Charlotte United Christian Academy
> > Library Services Administrator
> > IT Services Administrator
> > (704) 537-0331x101
> > (704) 497-2086
> > rileychilds.net
> > @rowdychildren
> > I use Lync (select External Contact on any XMPP chat client)
> >
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This email and any files transmitted with it are
> > the property of Charlotte United Christian Academy.  This e-mail, and any
> > attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named
> > herein and may contain confidential information that is privileged and/or
> > exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not one of the
> > named original recipients or have received this e-mail in error, please
> > permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any
> printout
> > thereof. Thank you for your compliance.  This email is also subject to
> > copyright. No part of it nor any attachments may be reproduced, adapted,
> > forwarded or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright
> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Katherine Deibel<mailto:[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>
> > Sent: ‎2/‎17/‎2015 11:10 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask] <javascript:;><mailto:
> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>
> > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Communications — conference and otherwise
> >
> > Just one thing to consider in regards to Google Docs: accessibility.
> > Google Docs are a bit notorious for being accessible (to screen readers)
> > one week and not the next. To be fair, ChromeVox usually works with
> > them, but very few people use ChromeVox at all.
> >
> > A practical approach would be to go with Google Docs but include a "If
> > you have trouble editing the Google Doc file, please contact X."
> >
> >
> > Kate Deibel, PhD | Web Applications Specialist
> > Information Technology Services
> > University of Washington Libraries
> > http://staff.washington.edu/deibel
> >
> > --
> >
> > "When Thor shows up, it's always deus ex machina."
> >
> > On 2015-02-17 11:14 AM, Becky Yoose wrote:
> > > Cary,
> > >
> > > I can speak to the signup for the Newcomer Dinner signup - previous
> years
> > > had the signup on the wiki, but this year we decided to try something
> > > different for the signup that didn't require an additional account to
> > sign
> > > up. This should have given Ryan a bit of a break with people requesting
> > > wiki accounts last minute to sign up for the dinner. The link to the
> > Google
> > > Doc was posted in the wiki, under the Newcomer dinner entry.
> > Communications
> > > to the list and users have linked to the wiki page (though I do count
> one
> > > communication to the group that I directly linked to the Google Doc).
> > >
> > > If folks did not like the Google Docs setup for the dinners this year,
> > > please let me know and I can always bring the signups back to the wiki
> > for
> > > future dinners. Again, it was an experiment for this year :c)
> > >
> > > I cannot speak for the Eventbrite pages, but my understanding that
> > > Eventbrite came with DLF handling registration finances this year.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Becky
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Cary Gordon <[log in to unmask]
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> This really speaks to the c4l who’s-in-charge-here / nobody is in
> > charge /
> > >> take the ball and run with it zeitgeist.
> > >>
> > >> We have one person — Ryan Wick — who carries most of the load for the
> > >> website and the wiki. I don’t think that he, or anyone else, takes
> > >> responsibility for organizing the content. From here,it looks like
> > >> everything is a mix of tradition and fire prevention. Accordingly,
> this
> > >> year we had:
> > >>
> > >> — The conference web pages on code4lib.org
> > >> — The usual assortment of pages on wiki.code4lib.org
> > >> — The newcomer dinner page on Google Docs
> > >> — Stuff on Eventbrite
> > >>
> > >> Resulting in a mix of the usual symptoms:
> > >>
> > >> — No single place to find stuff
> > >> — Conflicting information
> > >> — Not clear editorial policy
> > >>
> > >> So, what do we do, and who is this “we," anyhow?
> > >>
> > >> The conference organizers have control, in theory, but I think that
> they
> > >> are understandably loath to mess with the traditional mix. There is no
> > >> place for them to ask a question and get a single, cogent,
> authoritative
> > >> answer.
> > >>
> > >> Code4lib itself isn’t really a thing, just an us, and we have been
> loath
> > >> to form standing committees, although we have done that after a
> fashion
> > for
> > >> scholarships and the Journal. I think that the time has come for a
> > Code4lib
> > >> communications task force —I love that name — to address the structure
> > of
> > >> our public-facing resources. Any takers.
> > >>
> > >> In lieu of blessings from an executive structure, the task force can
> do
> > >> something with pasta to confirm its authority.
> > >>
> > >> Any takers?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Cary
> > >>
> > >>> On Feb 13, 2015, at 12:53 PM, Heller, Margaret <[log in to unmask]
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I think Sarah is absolutely right that we should have updated the
> > >> conference information page with information about streaming, as I
> don't
> > >> think most people not attending the conference would think to look at
> > the
> > >> wiki. Even if everyone forgot to do it during the conference that's a
> > note
> > >> to the future to remember to do it during the conference, and I've
> > edited
> > >> the page at http://code4lib.org/conference/2015 to give the link to
> the
> > >> YouTube channel.
> > >>>
> > >>> And thanks so much video team!
> > >>>
> > >>> Margaret Heller
> > >>> Digital Services Librarian
> > >>> Loyola University Chicago
> > >>> 773-508-2686
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]
> <javascript:;>] On Behalf
> > Of
> > >> Sarah Weissman
> > >>> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 2:18 PM
> > >>> To: [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
> > >>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Code4LibCon video crew thanks
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Francis Kayiwa <[log in to unmask]
> <javascript:;>>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Planning these things is tough work with numerous moving parts.
> Could
> > >>>> it have been posted once we were underway? Perhaps. That said there
> > >>>> was 450 odd people who were there none of whom (the author included)
> > >>>> thought to send a message on availability of video to this listserv.
> > >>>> (I know for certain it was tweeted and re-tweeted)
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I see what you are saying. I realize that logistics are tricky. I
> would
> > >> have probably missed a mailing list message if it had come last
> minute.
> > And
> > >> I wasn't checking Twitter in a timely manner for updates on a
> > conference I
> > >> wasn't attending and therefore wasn't all that aware of the exact
> timing
> > >> of. (Perhaps this is a great time to bump that librarians list to a
> more
> > >> visible position in my Twitter feed...)
> > >>>
> > >>> And I should say that I'm glad that there is video to watch at all
> and
> > >> grateful to the volunteer videographers that made it happen.
> > >>
> >
>


-- 
Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com