Last edit was October 2002. Is the idea still being discussed?
That's funny. I was just looking at the various UnifiedRecentChanges implementations. So, yes, it's still being discussed, and implemented, just not here, and with not quite so much pizazz. Pizazz is evil. -- SunirShah
It seems high time for a WikiPortal. We could get it to do versioning too. We have more than enough folk interested in scaling wiki, and lots of wild ideas floating around that deserve to be made real. WardCunningham, RichardDrake and PeterMerel want to be involved, and probably most of the WikiClone authors will too. Here's what we have in mind:
Peter, I'm just one minute into reading this page but I know that I haven't agreed to all of the above, right at this moment. --RichardDrake
I have reserved wiki.org for the purpose. Dues are to be $1000 USD per year for membership, though one need not be a member to participate. There won't be any advertising. A more complex memership structure will follow. Running a public participating server will be a condition of renewal. Email me for an application. -- WardCunningham
I think I'm cool with Ward's changes except for the dues. Make it $US100 and give folk with less understanding spouses a chance to play. I'm still trying to figure out how I'll break the news about my bet with Ron ...
On advertising, I was very much in several minds. On the one hand, wiki's never had any and it's good not to start. On the other, a for-profit consortium might scale a lot faster. On yet another, wiki is Ward's baby and all profits should properly go to him. On another, if this thing really does get global there'll be too much money for just Ward. And on still another, it'd be nice if any revenues at all got plowed back into the consortium. Can you reveal your reasoning Ward? -- Pete
The purpose I had in mind was simply to create InterWiki. A WikiPortal would provide a good way to tie together all the existing wikis by means of a shared category/RecentChanges facility. No TragedyOfTheCommons involved as far as I can figure out. But I don't exactly know what Ward has in mind though, and I'm looking forward to hearing more about his plans here. -- PM
My own goal is to remove any risk of tragedy and to allow wiki to scale by many orders of magnitude. My instinct says that this will be enabled by making wiki simpler, not more complex. For example, I don't believe we need structured link names. Wiki has gotten a lot of mileage out of a little ambiguity. I'd like to push that direction. -- WardCunningham
I confess I've seen real need for at least some kind of namespace structure in the ProjectWiki(s) I've been involved with. MultiWiki seemed great to me on these grounds. One wants, for example, to be able to have multiple pages within a story. But is this the sort of structure that concerns you Ward, or do you mean something more like the link names with embedded spaces that appear on some wikis?
My main worry about yesterday's suggestion here is still the entry fee. A lot of wiki folk have high disposable income and lots of coding ability, but given the 1K barrier many would just sit this one out and wait for a more open communal effort.
Wiki has worked well by including everyone - while some kind of dues seem necessary if the portal is to avoid ads, banner ads can be unobtrusive and easily filtered by anyone who cares to install any of the free/cheap ad blockers. Excess funds could then be dedicated to favourite charities. -- PM
I will not use a Wiki site with banner ads. I may, upon occasion, develop one. -- PhlIp
I think scaling Wiki sounds great, and I run a little public Wiki for Erlang programmers that I'd like to hook into a network. But there's one thing I have to ask: where does the advertising, for-profit consortium, and thousand-dollar fee come in to all this? I don't see that commercialism and scalability are linked at all, they seem like totally separate issues. Or is this just what happens when you get a lot of Americans gathered together? (caution: PissTake) -- LukeGorrie