Time for a FAQ. What about a Wiki ?

This group is very active. Active groups maintain a FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) . I think we need one now, so that we could direct newbies to it and concentrate on new topics here. I discovered Wiki, which is imho the ideal way to collaborate on documents. Basically a Wiki is a website that anybody can edit freely cia a very simple web interface. I just set up one and started experimenting a SolidWorksWiki. Try it and tell me : is it the right way to set up a SolidWorks FAQ ?

formatting link
(yes, .ch, not .com for this one)

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti
Loading thread data ...

Brilliant, Philippe, great initiative.

I can't think of a better way to address this definite need.

I tried a tiny edit (under "Inventor" changed "younger as SolidWorks" to "younger than SolidWorks"), and it worked fine.

If you get recurrent problem edits or deletions, can you block that person or area? (I guess the most likely areas to attract problems are the descriptions of the various packages, might attract ravers and knockers, not to mention jingoists!) Obviously there's no need to solve that if it doesn't happen, but it doesn't hurt to set things up mindful of that as a possibility.

Is it easy enough to add an English translation to the buttons? (or a single explanatory location for all French terms used?) Even for those with a working knowledge of French some terms are unfamiliar in a computing context, such as "aperçu".

One thing about removing "outdated" information- it might pay to have a recommendation that information about previous versions be flagged as no longer current, but retained on the site for several years- increasingly as the product matures it is likely that not all users will feel the need to immediately adopt every major version change.

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to get this ball rolling, I think it could be a real asset.

Reply to
Andrew Troup

(blush)

Wikis are by essence open. The idea is that you can undo unwanted contributions. If it works for a great project like the

formatting link
I guess it should work for a limited audience such as the SolidWorks users...

However, the engine I use (spikini) has 2 mechanisms that improve safety:

1) ownership: the first author of a page can control who might edit it. 2) version control : you can retrieve the state of a page at any date (click the date at the bottom of the page)

Yes, sorry, I thought the thing was multilingual... I just set it to English (mostly...)

Can be done with the revision control above.

Visit the SolidWorks Wiki at

formatting link
!

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

"Andrew Troup" a écrit dans le message de news:

5w2Fc.6201$ snipped-for-privacy@news.xtra.co.nz...
+1

Some terms are unfamiliar in a computing

= Preview

Reply to
Jean Marc BRUN

does this wiki implementation follow the rules of other wiki systems? Like using external links in the form of [external link

formatting link

Johnny

Reply to
Johnny Geling

Fabulous! Is the platypus part of the SpiKini logo, or should someone be working on a model of the egg-laying web-footed mammal with poisonous spurs?

Reply to
Dale Dunn

I was unable to login after I received my password. I was sent ....

Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Please contact the server administrator, and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error. More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

Keith Streich

Reply to
Keith Streich

"Johnny Geling" wrote

almost. It is [external link->

formatting link
rules are here
formatting link

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

you don't need to login or any password to contribute! I didn't enable login (yet) as I have to set up the security of the whole website. I will do it one day to enable(registered users) to upload images and models.

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

Is there some way to search the Wiki? Once we get people to start filling in the FAQs and Tips and Tricks, there are going to be a heck of a lot of entries. (OK, maybe a little wishful thinking there. I've got an ungodly number of tips and tricks saved from this newsgroup, but no time to edit them and put them in the Wiki. I suppose many of us are in the same boat.)

Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"

Reply to
Jerry Steiger

I looked around a bit and found myself enjoying the opportunity to correct grammatical & spelling mistakes right then & there. Since it appears that the universal language is going to be English, I would hope that nobody would be offended if a natural English speaking person corrected those kinds of things. But I also see a possibility of abuse as it's all wide open.

Here's a good example of something we should address. In the Macro page is this statement: "A macro can do anything you can do manually in SolidWorks by calling API functions."

I'm not sure this is absolutely correct as every once in a while we see a request for access to something through the API. This tells me that someone saw something they wanted to do, but couldn't get to it yet.

So, how do we best address questions & differences of opinions? I would not want to just change someone else's stuff, but if I think it's not entirely accurate, it should be discussed. Maybe bringing it back to here would be the proper method.

WT

Reply to
Wayne Tiffany

Philippe...great, nice and cool!

WT...would it be too difficult to "approve pending adds/modifications"? Many calendar kind of web scripts are using it. We just have to have enough people who has rights to approve, so that it all doesn't fall on to one person.

Or at least there should be possibility to comment what ever somebody else is writing..

Reply to
Markku Lehtola

Philippe - this is a great initiative - I am sure it will be a great success, as this newsgroup is very progressive and tolerant of all ( most ;-) contributors.

Good point Wayne - and just to get my light hearted bickering in first

- For grammer, is it going to be English English, old Colonial English or Commonwealth English, or Euro-English. For spelling please can we just stick to Oxford Dictionary spelling.

I can see the pendants amongst us are going to have to start taking medication to keep calm.

Regards

Jonathan Stedman

Reply to
jjs

"Wayne Tiffany" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@uni-berlin.de:

I'd like to suggest that where there are differences in opinion or technique, each opinion should be documented with it's strengths and weaknesses. Let the reader decide which way suits them best. If there's no concensus, the wiki article shouldn't have the appearance of concensus.

Reply to
Dale Dunn

Oh, no, no, no, no - American middle of the country English WILL be the standard - so says I! :-)) (If I put this in the Wiki, y'all could be changing it right now.) :-)))

Ok, so we now have our first major disagreement, but I can see many back and forth changings by some people that are not very tolerant at times.

You know what, maybe we are putting the cart before the horse here - let's see where it goes. I'm cool. Hey, it's 5:30 on a Friday afternoon on a holiday weekend - I'm going home.

Oh, take a look at this fireworks display - it's pretty good.

formatting link
WT

Reply to
Wayne Tiffany

Why don't we all just sign our answers? That makes it easier for us to see where the answers are coming from and also will tend to keep the nice people from screwing with other people's text. (Nothing will stop the jerks, but we don't have any here!)

Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"

Reply to
Jerry Steiger

Sure. I just made a few pages quickly to show how it could work. I think different opinions can be either added to a page ("a different opinion on this is ..." or "{I think differently about this, what is your opinion?}" between {} for italics and next editors could try to merge/sum up the contributions.

Markku Lehtola" wrote:

It wouldn't be a Wiki anymore...

I suggest to use {italics} for this. Example

formatting link

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

Right. It can be done as in

formatting link
You can even make your own page...

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

What about the SW knowledgebase?

Other than the fact that:

  1. You have to be on subscription.
  2. You have to have the patience of Job to find anything.
  3. Many articles are outdated.
  4. It doesn't work with Google.

And then there is the online help and a bunch of other stuff they have on the official web site.

Philippe Guglielmetti wrote:

Reply to
kellnerp

I think Phillipe is suggesting, and (assuming he is!) I agree:

The prime agenda for our own FAQ site is to have a catch-all redirection resource for all those newbie FAQs which experience suggests will inevitably land here: how do I save files so they can be read in a previous version, what's different about SldWks etc etc

Secondly any SWks resource will always shy away from certain topics, generally to do with what doesn't work, or what should work but is currently broken, or what does work but you have to walk a tightrope to persuade it to do so. Anything, in short, which does not bathe their cherished offspring in the most favourable possible light.

Further to that, some aspects of SldWks documentation are misleading, unclear, or wrong. I'm happy to assert that these aspects seem to me to be diminishing over time. Furthermore, the hypertext concept of On-Line Help can make it very difficult to find the answers to certain questions, particularly to a user whose product-specific vocab or lexicon is not up to speed for whatever reason. I still stumble across backwaters of info whose entranceways have eluded my grasp for years. A linear text, as in one intended from the outset to be printed, tends not to have these undiscovered pockets.

I think our test for whether to post a topic under the SolidWiki (hummmm) should be:

Can a satisfactory answer to this question realistically be found by the sort of user it is targeted to, using on-line Help? If so, only post an answer if that question repeatedly comes up on the NG. (Preferably make the answer a more concise and clear summation, and refer to the Help page by name) If the answer in Help is judged insufficient or deficient, concentrate on correcting that.

If a satisfactory answer to this question cannot realistically be found in Help, is the SldWks KB on the case? If so, either do not post, or simply post a reference to the KB article, including the number. If not, go for it, and by all means rip into SldWks for this gap in their documentation. I think these two places between them should be enough for anyone to have to consult. SldWks have over the years progressively fragmented the infobase and splattered it across an increasing number of resources, NONE of which tries to be self-sufficient. I find this alarming. They must think we're palaentologists, not designers and engineers.

I am not currently a subscription member, as a protest measure (largely about product reliability), but notwithstanding I don't think we should set up a parallel resource to the KB, thereby offering free access to a valuable resource which is not part of the deal non-subscription people have signed up to.

I don't have any problem with us giving away our own hard-earned knowledge of SolidWorks, in fact I positively rejoice in it, but I draw the line at giving away theirs; I believe it is and should remain their choice.

If you are one of the many netizens who fervently believe all knowledge should be free, please do not flame me. I have given the arguments a lot of thought, and respectfully end up disagreeing.

What I post here is not intended as a sermon, simply a point of view.

Reply to
Andrew Troup

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.