Hi, a quick comment on your stylesheets, you should reduce the gap between the underlining and the text in links. By 1 or 2 px. It looks a bit odd as it is. - Magnus
Thanks very much to the both of you. Very helpful :) - Simon
Hyperlinking is a curious beast. You can have structure, but another way of looking at it is.. well.. When I write a piece for a project such as this, every time I gets to a noun, I ask myself if it's a noun that specifically relates to the project's topic. Is it a noun that I personally could write a piece about in the future if ever there was time. Not necessarily promising myself that I will. I make it linkable on the understanding that maybe someday, someone will. So in theory the project becomes cross-referenced on the fly as you go, and sure one's never going to be 100% accurate but it does help the project build itself and become easier for people to navigate. You can do the flowcharts too, and a combination of structure and improvisation is most ideal, but a project of this nature can't be read linearly. Some parts of it will demand structure, like the episode lists. Other parts won't be quite as easy to visualize in a flowchart. I hope that helps. - ZachsMind
I started with some kind of cast / crew / seasons structure. Now things are organised mostly by Wren and Zachsmind. Things link. Some things links structurally. Some don't. That's Wiki, I think. But then I'm not a very structured person.
I shall try and explain, I didn't make myself that clear. When the writers contribute to the wiki, is there a structure to work to.
For example
Buffy the series
|
|
_____________________|___________________
| | | |
cast crew seasons characters
(With obviously more levels beneath the first level)
I'm interested in the design aspect of the wiki, how everything links - Simon
Someone in the GuestBook asked:
"One other question when it comes to the design of the wiki do people use diagrams i.e. top-down etc to see what the design looks like?"
Answer: Could you explain what you mean by that? CvOdB (10 Sept 2003 11.44pm CET)
Has anyone thought about doing a faceted classification for the whedonesque postings?
A what?
See http://www.facetmap.com/(approve sites) for a quick intro and demo. See http://IAwiki.net/FacetedClassification(approve sites) for a longer ramble and lots of links.
Go to http://www.facetmap.com/demo/browse.jsp?map=buffyverse(approve sites) for a (very) incomplete demonstration of work in progress. See how you can filter down the 1482 postings to just the 961 for BtVS, note how the number of interviews drops from 108 to 69, click to see those 69 BtVS interviews, see how within that set there are 51 safe postings and 18 spolier postings, filter again by male actor (6), see that 5 of those 6 are safe, and only one spoiler, and so on.
Start over, this time filter by spoiler first, then by actor, then by resource type, then by series, and you end up at the same place again.