Legacy:Administration
Version 1
Date: 2008-03-12 16:16:24 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Initial version
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site I think we could use a catchier name for the site. Any ideas? * HarcoWeb * HermesWeb * Great Library * Redcap II = Site design I would like to revise the navigation sidebar (though I am not sure of the final design I want) but I can't find the documentation for how to do that. Pitt, do I have the permissions to do that? Can we put in a footer with trademark notice? I will post the notice I want here, after I have time to think a bit more about what should be included. = Inviting New Contributors (Andrew Gronosky): The more I look at this project, the bigger the task of content creation appears. I am also concerned about an independent Wiki indexing project that has started because fans got impatient waiting for me to get this site ready. I want to bring some helpers on board to start adding truly useful content. I'll start with a small number of people and then expand gradually. My main concerns are: 1) Contributors not respecting the need to avoid hurting Atlas's sales; 2) Contributors not understanding how to avoid hurting Atlas's sales; 3) vandalism. * First priority: Write a solid policy page explaining in detail what not to write. * Next priority: If possible - make all new account applications go through an administrator for approval. Give administrator permission to lock out accounts. This is necessary to protect against spam and vandalism (and incompetent contributors). I (Andrew G.) will be the policeman if someone will give me the proverbial badge and gun. * Third: Decide on some simple recommendations for naming convention and page organization. We already have a good start on this. Should page names use underscores or CamelCase? It may already be too late to change. :-(
Version 2
Date: 2008-03-15 02:34:52 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Added roles and to-do list
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. Here is what I would suggest: "Ars Magica and Mythic Europe are trademarks of Trident, Inc. d/b/a Atlas Games. Order of Hermes and Tremere are trademarks of White Wolf, Inc. Other trademarks are the property of their respective owners." My rough knowledge of U.S. intellectual property laws suggests this is sufficient; one doesn't need permission to simply refer to a trademarked term for non-commercial purposes (I hope!). = Administrative Roles and Titles * Pitt Murmann: Founder, system administrator, Pie architect, all-around Web guru * Andrew Gronosky: Benevolent(?) dictator Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical # Create mailing list for administrators # Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) # Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational # Recruit 1-3 new contributors # Further develop policies and guidelines == Content # Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use Pie. # Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? # Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules FAQ from Redcap.
Version 3
Date: 2008-03-15 11:14:12 GMT Author: Yair Comment: a few comments
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * Yair: how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. Here is what I would suggest: "Ars Magica and Mythic Europe are trademarks of Trident, Inc. d/b/a Atlas Games. Order of Hermes and Tremere are trademarks of White Wolf, Inc. Other trademarks are the property of their respective owners." My rough knowledge of U.S. intellectual property laws suggests this is sufficient; one doesn't need permission to simply refer to a trademarked term for non-commercial purposes (I hope!). * Yair: Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * Yair: I would suggest making the Overview page the front-page, not the About page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. * Yair: I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. = Administrative Roles and Titles * Pitt Murmann: Founder, system administrator, Pie architect, all-around Web guru * Andrew Gronosky: Benevolent(?) dictator * I nominate myself, Yair, to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores rereally necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * Yair: I would suggest making the Overview page the front-page, not the About page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. * Yair: I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. = Administrative Roles and Titles * Pitt Murmann: Foun * Yair: I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the "[tribunal X]" page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. der, system administrator, Pie architect, all-around Web guru * Andrew Gronosky: Benevolent(? * Yair: I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well) Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can...
Version 4
Date: 2008-03-15 13:20:27 GMT Author: Yair Comment:
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * Yair: how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. Here is what I would suggest: "Ars Magica and Mythic Europe are trademarks of Trident, Inc. d/b/a Atlas Games. Order of Hermes and Tremere are trademarks of White Wolf, Inc. Other trademarks are the property of their respective owners." My rough knowledge of U.S. intellectual property laws suggests this is sufficient; one doesn't need permission to simply refer to a trademarked term for non-commercial purposes (I hope!). * Yair: Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * Yair: I would suggest making the Overview page the front-page, not the About page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Cannon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Cannon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * Yair: I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. = Administrative Roles and Titles * Pitt Murmann: Founder, system administrator, Pie architect, all-around Web guru * Andrew Gronosky: Benevolent(?) dictator * I nominate myself, Yair, to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical # Create mailing list for administrators # Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) # Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational # Recruit 1-3 new contributors # Further develop policies and guidelines == Content # Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use Pie. # Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? * Yair: I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the "[tribunal X]" page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribu
Version 5
Date: 2008-03-15 16:09:42 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Note to capture popular idea
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * Yair: how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * Andrew: HarcoWeb is another idea. * Andrew: HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. Here is what I would suggest: "Ars Magica and Mythic Europe are trademarks of Trident, Inc. d/b/a Atlas Games. Order of Hermes and Tremere are trademarks of White Wolf, Inc. Other trademarks are the property of their respective owners." My rough knowledge of U.S. intellectual property laws suggests this is sufficient; one doesn't need permission to simply refer to a trademarked term for non-commercial purposes (I hope!). * Yair: Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * Yair: I would suggest making the Overview page the front-page, not the About page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Cannon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * Yair: I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. = Administrative Roles and Titles * Pitt Murmann: Founder, system administrator, Pie architect, all-around Web guru * Andrew Gronosky: Benevolent(?) dictator * I nominate myself, Yair, to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical # Create mailing list for administrators # Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) # Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational # Recruit 1-3 new contributors # Further develop policies and guidelines == Content # Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use Pie. # Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? * Yair: I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the "[tribunal X]" page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. # Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules FAQ from Redcap * Yair: I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also,
Version 6
Date: 2008-03-15 16:13:27 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Response on Yair's copyright comments
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * Yair: how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * Andrew: HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. * Yair: Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * Andrew: OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * Yair: I would suggest making the Overview page the front-page, not the About page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Cannon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * Yair: I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** Andrew: We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical # Create mailing list for administrators # Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) # Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational # Recruit 1-3 new contributors # Further develop policies and guidelines == Content # Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use Pie. # Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? * Yair: I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the "[tribunal X]" page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. # Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules FAQ from Redcap * Yair: I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can...
Version 7
Date: 2008-03-15 16:14:15 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Mailing list is done
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * Yair: how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * Andrew: HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. * Yair: Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * Andrew: OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * Yair: I would suggest making the Overview page the front-page, not the About page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Cannon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * Yair: I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** Andrew: We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. = Administrative Roles and Titles * Pitt Murmann: Founder, system administrator, Pie architect, all-around Web guru * Andrew Gronosky: Benevolent(?) dictator * I nominate myself, Yair, to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical # ts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) # Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational # Recruit 1-3 new contributors # Further develop policies and guidelines == Content # Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use Pie. # Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? * Yair: I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the "[tribunal X]" page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. # Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules FAQ from Redcap * Yair: I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can...
Version 8
Date: 2008-03-15 20:45:22 GMT Author: pm Comment: Reformatting. Note on name collisions
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. * '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I would suggest making the [[Overview]] page the front-page, not the [[About]] page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * Pitt Murmann: Founder, system administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, all-around Web guru * Andrew Gronosky: Benevolent(?) dictator * I nominate myself, Yair, to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. *** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can...
Version 9
Date: 2008-03-15 21:50:00 GMT Author: pm Comment: Reformatting. Note on name collisions
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. * '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I would suggest making the [[Overview]] page the front-page, not the [[About]] page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Founder, system administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Benevolent(?) dictator. * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of ronosky]]: Benevolent(?) dictator. * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. *** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partia * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]).
Version 10
Date: 2008-03-16 01:15:07 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Responses to content discussion
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. * '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I would suggest making the [[Overview]] page the front-page, not the [[About]] page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Founder, system administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Benevolent(?) dictator. * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. *** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. *** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. * '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense)
Version 11
Date: 2008-03-16 01:24:44 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Changed my role
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. * '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. * '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I would suggest making the [[Overview]] page the front-page, not the [[About]] page. People coming into the site would want to see its functionality, not a detailed explanation about what this site is and isn't and how to contribute to it; that comes later. ** I suggest reorganizing the page too. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Founder, system administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitoricensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. *** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. *** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical p
Version 12
Date: 2008-03-16 09:01:41 GMT Author: Yair Comment:
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a , let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Founder, system administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. * Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the n ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad.
Version 13
Date: 2008-03-16 13:08:06 GMT Author: Yair Comment: detail on books?
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Founder, system administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * ''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus
Version 14
Date: 2008-03-16 14:07:23 GMT Author: pm Comment: Comments on Tribunal pages and page name nomenclature
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible.
Version 15
Date: 2008-03-16 14:31:44 GMT Author: Yair Comment: answering Pitt
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * I nominate myself, [[Yair]], to the position of Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. ;-) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) * *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes
Version 16
Date: 2008-03-16 14:33:03 GMT Author: Yair Comment: assumed my title
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible.
Version 17
Date: 2008-03-16 19:06:38 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Response on Yair's copyright comment and on level of detail
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * '''Yair''': I don't suppose it is possible to activate a Discuss-this-page feature? That would be helpful. ** '''Andrew''': We have a poor man's version of that: the mailing list. ** '''Pitt''': I'm afraid, the wiki doesn't support comments on pages as of yet. This might be an option for the future. Meanwhile, let's help ourselves with the mailing list as well as bulleted lists and enumerations. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. *** *Andrew*: With regard to copyright: I think it was a mistake for David to ever have asserted copyright on Project: Redcap -- it causes only difficulties and is no real benefit to David. He did this in 1997 when the World Wide Web was like the Wild West and no one knew what would happen; I think his intent was to stop someone from plagiarizing Redcap and trying to make money from it. Since we (I) are making a big deal about Atlas's copyrights I feel the need to be consistent. We ought not to just pretend the copyright doesn't exist. David gave me (written) permission to "do whatever I want" with the Redcap content. So when I say "used with permission," what I want to communicate is 1) the copyright does still exist and 2) we don't need to worry about it. ** *Pitt*: *: With regard to copyright: I think it was a mistake for David to ever have asserted copyright on Project: Redcap -- it causes only difficulties and is no real benefit to David. He did this in 1997 when the World Wide Web was like the Wild West and no one knew what would happen; I think his intent was to stop someone from plagiarizing Redcap and trying to make money from it. Since we (I) are making a big deal about Atlas's copyrights I feel the need to be consistent. We ought not to just pretend the copyright doesn't exist. David gave me (written) permission to "do whatever I want" with the Redcap content. So when I say "used with permission," what I want to communicate is 1) the copyright does still exist and 2) we don't need to worry about it. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]],** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules ope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games p
Version 18
Date: 2008-03-18 10:12:18 GMT Author: Yair Comment: Overview & Feature Request
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. ** Since Andrew agreed it is better than the current one, I'm gonna change the [[Overview]] to the one in the [[Sandbox]] now. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. *** *Andrew*: With regard to copyright: I think it was a mistake for David to ever have asserted copyright on Project: Redcap -- it causes only difficulties and is no real benefit to David. He did this in 1997 when the World Wide Web was like the Wild West and no one knew what would happen; I think his intent was to stop someone from plagiarizing Redcap and trying to make money from it. Since we (I) are making a big deal about Atlas's copyrights I feel the need to be consistent. We ought not to just pretend the copyright doesn't exist. David gave me (written) permission to "do whatever I want" with the Redcap content. So when I say "used with permission," what I want to communicate is 1) the copyright does still exist and 2) we don't need to worry about it. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are per
Version 19
Date: 2008-03-18 10:13:27 GMT Author: Yair Comment:
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. * Since Andrew agreed it is better than the current one, I'm gonna change the [[Overview]] to the one in the [[Sandbox]] now. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. *** *Andrew*: With regard to copyright: I think it was a mistake for David to ever have asserted copyright on Project: Redcap -- it causes only difficulties and is no real benefit to David. He did this in 1997 when the World Wide Web was like the Wild West and no one knew what would happen; I think his intent was to stop someone from plagiarizing Redcap and trying to make money from it. Since we (I) are making a big deal about Atlas's copyrights I feel the need to be consistent. We ought not to just pretend the copyright doesn't exist. David gave me (written) permission to "do whatever I want" with the Redcap content. So when I say "used with permission," what I want to communicate is 1) the copyright does still exist and 2) we don't need to worry about it. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible.
Version 20
Date: 2008-03-19 13:22:04 GMT Author: Yair Comment:
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. ** Since Andrew agreed it is better than the current one, I'm gonna change the [[Overview]] to the one in the [[Sandbox]] now. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. *** *Andrew*: With regard to copyright: I think it was a mistake for David to ever have asserted copyright on Project: Redcap -- it causes only difficulties and is no real benefit to David. He did this in 1997 when the World Wide Web was like the Wild West and no one knew what would happen; I think his intent was to stop someone from plagiarizing Redcap and trying to make money from it. Since we (I) are making a big deal about Atlas's copyrights I feel the need to be consistent. We ought not to just pretend the copyright doesn't exist. David gave me (written) permission to "do whatever I want" with the Redcap content. So when I say "used with permission," what I want to communicate is 1) the copyright does still exist and 2) we don't need to worry about it. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option.
Version 21
Date: 2008-03-25 01:39:20 GMT Author: dchart Comment: Redcap copyright solution
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': I suggest reorganizing the Overview page. That the wiki lacks a hierarchy is one thing, presenting things in a disorganizing manner isn't helpful to its users - especially first-time users. I suggest a division into information on Canon, Fan Content, and Misc. The suggested reorganized page is at the [[Sandbox]] page. ** Since Andrew agreed it is better than the current one, I'm gonna change the [[Overview]] to the one in the [[Sandbox]] now. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. *** *Andrew*: With regard to copyright: I think it was a mistake for David to ever have asserted copyright on Project: Redcap -- it causes only difficulties and is no real benefit to David. He did this in 1997 when the World Wide Web was like the Wild West and no one knew what would happen; I think his intent was to stop someone from plagiarizing Redcap and trying to make money from it. Since we (I) are making a big deal about Atlas's copyrights I feel the need to be consistent. We ought not to just pretend the copyright doesn't exist. David gave me (written) permission to "do whatever I want" with the Redcap content. So when I say "used with permission," what I want to communicate is 1) the copyright does still exist and 2) we don't need to worry about it. **** '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] ** '''Yair''': I suggest migrating the Grand Index - partial though it is! - from the wiki as well. Also, I'll write some stuff up when I can... * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Sinc
Version 22
Date: 2008-03-25 16:21:21 GMT Author: Yair Comment: question about copyrights 2
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Irg/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Yair''': I suggest replicating the redcap.org organization in this respect: provide links to Tribunal-pages each containing a referral to the _tribunal X_ page actually describing the Tribunal in cannonical ArM, and a list of non-Canonical covenants. You don't want the non-Cannonical covenants when you look up the cannonical one, and you don't want the brief description of the tribunal and links to official sources on it when you're browsing for other people's sagas. ** '''Pitt''': That's probably a good idea, and provides a reasonable means to find what you are looking for. ** '''Andrew''' I tried this out for the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]]. That page refers to the canonical Tribunal, and has a link to the [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page of non-canonical Saga sites. What do you guys think? If you like it then we can close this task. ** '''Yair''': I like your [[Stonehenge Sagas]] page a lot and copied the formatting for the [[Rhine Sagas]] page (I didn't realize we needed David Charts' copyright notice there, I thought you had copyrights over redcap content). Regarding the [[Stonehenge Tribunal]] page, I think a brief description of the tribunal is in order and that the list of covenants shouldn't be bulleted as that puts too much attention/space to it; see the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page for my conversion of your format with these changes. *** *Andrew*: With regard to copyright: I think it was a mistake for David to ever have asserted copyright on Project: Redcap -- it causes only difficulties and is no real benefit to David. He did this in 1997 when the World Wide Web was like the Wild West and no one knew what would happen; I think his intent was to stop someone from plagiarizing Redcap and trying to make money from it. Since we (I) are making a big deal about Atlas's copyrights I feel the need to be consistent. We ought not to just pretend the copyright doesn't exist. David gave me (written) permission to "do whatever I want" with the Redcap content. So when I say "used with permission," what I want to communicate is 1) the copyright does still exist and 2) we don't need to worry about it. **** '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. **** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; a**** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) ** *gh I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[httpions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option.
Version 23
Date: 2008-03-26 18:12:58 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Copyright gets its own heading
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussionity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Actually, I don't think the scenario you mention (posting Atlas's cover images) is "fair use" at all; fair use means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." Any the map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going much too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use all of this stuff but that raises another issue: I think it would be rude to pester David and John asking for permission to use this or that all the time. We volunteered to invest a lot of time in this site, but David and John didn't. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Actually, I don't think the scenario you mention (posting Atlas's cover images) is "fair use" at all; fair use means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." Any the map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going much too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use all of this stuff but that raises another issue: I think it would be rude to pester David and John asking for permission to use this or that all the time. We volunteered to invest a lot of time in this site, but David and John didn't.
Version 24
Date: 2008-03-26 20:58:38 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Moderated tone of copyright comments
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law he copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far om an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but tsome raises another issue: namely, we ought not tonamely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, s, pesing John Nephew and David Chart with requests David Chart with requeXfor Y
Version 25
Date: 2008-03-27 02:51:35 GMT Author: pm Comment: Undeleting contents.
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. ** *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. * *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relat
Version 26
Date: 2008-03-27 09:11:27 GMT Author: Yair Comment:
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. ** *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering John Nephew and David Chart with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation?
Version 27
Date: 2008-03-27 11:43:25 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Answered questions about copyrights for maps
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. ** *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering John Nephew and David Chart with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? *** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer.
Version 28
Date: 2008-03-27 13:58:18 GMT Author: pm Comment: On maps.
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. ** *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering John Nephew and David Chart with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? *** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. *** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless.
Version 29
Date: 2008-03-27 14:37:15 GMT Author: Yair Comment: map discussion
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. ** *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering John Nephew and David Chart with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? *** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. *** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. I certainly don't have the skill (or time, or program) to draw a map, based on historial maps or not, or to do all the nifty linking Andrew suggests. I was thinking instead to rely on maps already in the public domain, such as ancient maps, or modern but free maps, or even NASA's Blue Marble satellite picture - geography hasn't change THAT much that a modern picture of the Europe isn't a good reflection of it in 1220.
Version 30
Date: 2008-03-27 19:22:35 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Map discussion
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. ** *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering John Nephew and David Chart with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? *** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. *** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. I certainly don't have the skill (or time, or program) to draw a map, based on historial maps or not, or to do all the nifty linking Andrew suggests. I was thinking instead to rely on maps already in the public domain, such as ancient maps, or modern but free maps, or even NASA's Blue Marble satellite picture - geography hasn't change THAT much that a modern picture of the Europe isn't a good reflection of it in 1220. *** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now.
Version 31
Date: 2008-03-27 20:35:25 GMT Author: pm Comment: Disk space.
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We could use a catchier name for the site. The current suggestion is HermesWeb. If anyone has other ideas, please post them here. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design *I think it's advisable to add a trademark notice at the foot of each page. ** '''Yair''': Is that really necessary at the bottom of EACH page? I would think putting it in the front-page and perhaps the copyrights page would be enough; just it isn't added to the bottom of every page in a book. Of course, I am not a lawyer. ** '''Andrew''': OK, maybe it's better to put a trademark notice only on the page that defines the trademarked term. * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Head Vagabond, In Charge of Nothing In Particular. Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. == Technical * Set up approval mechanism for user accounts. (for now we are using security through obscurity) * Set up mechanism for deactivating a user account (this may be a hard job) == Organizational * Recruit 1-3 new contributors * Further develop policies and guidelines == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. * Decide where fan Saga sites will go. On Tribunal pages, all on one big index page, something else? ** '''Andrew'': This is pretty much settled. I moved the copyright spin-off to a new subject heading and deleted the old discussion ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. * Get some useful content going. Andrew G. will start by migrating the rules [[http://redcap.org/FAQ/FAQ.html|FAQ from Redcap]] * '''Pitt''': We will have to think about name collisions in a multilingual environment. Name collisions occur when multiple pages refer to a term that has the same spelling in different languages. This is especially relevant for proper names. Solutions that work out of the box: name spaces/hierarchies (like [@French/Bonisagus]), or specifiers (like [@Bonisagus (French)]). ** '''Andrew''' I think it makes more sense to say [@Bonisagus (Fran�ais)] -- refer to the language by the name it calls itself. I slightly prefer to have the language keyword after the page title, so the title shows up in alphabetic order grouped next to other pages on the same subject (lexical proximity corresponds to semantic proximity, if that makes any sense) ** '''Yair''': This sounds very sensible to me. The primary site must remain pure English, other languages will have a slightly more difficult time in defining page names - that's not that bad. ** *Pitt*: I agree with both of you. Since multi-byte characters are permitted in page names, even [@Bonisagus (...)] would be possible. * *Yair*: I accidently deleted some stuff from the Sandbox (your templates, Pitt), and can't get it back. Is there a way to revert the page? I can't find that option. ** *Pitt*: No problem. Just select the page (or what is left of it), and click *History*. In the forthcoming list, click the *Edit* symbol of the version you would like to get back. A new version is started, and you can combine any new text with the snapshot of the version you just selected. Nothing is ever lost unless you completely delete a page. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with re with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? *** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. *** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. I certainly don't have the skill (or time, or program) to draw a map, based on historial maps or not, or to do all the nifty linking Andrew suggests. I was thinking instead to rely on maps already in the public domain, such as ancient maps, or modern but free maps, or even NASA's Blue Marble satellite picture - geography hasn't change THAT much that a modern picture of the Europe isn't a good reflection of it in 1220. *** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months f *** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
Version 32
Date: 2008-04-26 17:25:58 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Cleaned out old business
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design '''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. ==Technical * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... == Organizational * Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors. * Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]]. == Content * Revise writer's guidelines. Separate into sub-topics: what title to use, how to lay out a page (give an example outline?), how to use [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]]. *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. =Copyright Issues * '''David''': Copyright, unlike trademark, comes automatically. But yes, back in 1997 I was being cautious. At this point, however, I'm happy to put all of the Redcap files into the public domain, so that copyright will go away and you can stop worrying about it. ** '''Yair''': Good! A more thorny issue: Atlas' copyrights over images. I presume uploading the picture of the product ([[GotF]] etc.) and posting it on the relevant page falls under Fair Use? Or is allowed? What about drawing the boundaries of regional tribunals? I put up a few for illustrative purposes, see for example the [[Rhine Tribunal]] page. Is that alright? (Even if not, BTW, I believe drawing the boundaries on an otherwise public domain map is; although I wouldn't do it if Atlas objects...) *** '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. The map of the Tribunal boundaries is, IMO, going too far (the image is scanned from an Atlas Games book). We could probably get permission to use some of this stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? *** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. *** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. I certainly don't have the skill (or time, or program) to draw a map, based on historial maps or not, or to do all the nifty linking Andrew suggests. I was thinking instead to rely on maps already in the public domain, such as ancient maps, or modern but free maps, or even NASA's Blue Marble satellite picture - geography hasn't change THAT much that a modern picture of the Europe isn't a good reflection of it in 1220. *** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now. *** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
Version 33
Date: 2008-04-26 17:37:53 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Re-organized and trimmed topics
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design '''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. ==Technical * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... * *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. ** * == Organizational * Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors. * Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]]. == Content * '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? ** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. ** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now. ===Level of detail *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. =Copyright Issues * '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission.
Version 34
Date: 2008-04-29 15:09:55 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment:
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design '''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. ==Technical * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... * *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. ** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations. == Organizational * Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors. * Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]]. == Content * '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? ** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. ** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now. ===Level of detail *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. =Copyright Issues * '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. *** '''Andrew''': I guess an exception would be if an Atlas Games employee with authority to make such decisions were to post copyrighted material here (with an appropriate notice). We'd be glad to accept anything Atlas wants to contribute, but as we agreed above, let's not pester Atlas with requests.
Version 35
Date: 2008-05-08 02:03:37 GMT Author: Visitor Comment: Test of new user
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design '''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. ==Technical * '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... * '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... * *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. ** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations. == Organizational * Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors. * Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]]. == Content * '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? ** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. ** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now. ===Level of detail *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. =Copyright Issues * '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. *** '''Andrew''': I guess an exception would be if an Atlas Games employee with authority to make such decisions were to post copyrighted material here (with an appropriate notice). We'd be glad to accept anyth
Version 36
Date: 2008-05-08 02:06:06 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Confirmed ability to delete users
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = Naming the Site We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities. * '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica). * '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea. = Site design '''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. ==Technical * '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.) and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.) * '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it... * *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly. ** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations. == Organizational * Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors. * Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]]. == Content * '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation? ** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer. ** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless. *** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now. ===Level of detail *'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away. ** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project. ** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) ) ** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product. =Copyright Issues * '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y. *** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission. *** '''Andrew''': I guess an exception would be if an Atlas Games employee with authority to make such decisions were to post copyrighted material here (with an appropriate notice).
Version 37
Date: 2008-05-08 17:27:08 GMT Author: pm Comment: Performed hard disk upgrade
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= Naming the Site
We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities.
* '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica).
* '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea.
= Site design
'''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Technical
* '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.)
* '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it...
* *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly.
** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
** *Pitt*: Just for the records: Last month, I descended into the vault of my [?ISP|Internet Service Provider] and upgraded the hard disk of the web server. There's now plenty of space for [[About|HermesWeb]], and we don't need to hold ourselves back anymore. This concerns those blessed with the [[Long-Winded]] ([[Enduring Constitution]]?) [[Virtue|virtue]] as well as those benefiting from being [[Inspirational]] or having [[Free Expression]].
* *Pitt*: The next major upgrade will be on the side of software. The code of the next major release is starting to take shape, but is still far from being considered even beta. Focusing on the requirements of our current project, the most prominent features will be:
** Restructuring the database: The combination of lots of pages on the one side, and many page versions on the other, will slow things down on the long run. Respective counter measures are being worked on.
** Localization: The ability to manage multiple languages of a page.
** Customization: Form and function should be more adaptable, and administrators should be able to make changes to the look & feel of the site without the help of the superuser. Keyword: navigation menu, [[http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/|CSS]].
** Additional user level: Instead of just two (''User'', ''Administrator''), three would be fine: ''User'', ''Operator'', ''Administrator''.
** TBC
* *Pitt*: Just for the records: Last month, I descended into the vault of my [?ISP|Internet Service Provider] and upgraded the hard disk of the web server. There's now plenty of space for [[About|HermesWeb]], and we don't need to hold ourselves back anymore. This concerns those blessed with the [[Long-Winded]] ([[Enduring Constitution]]?) [[Virtue|virtue]] as well as those benefiting from being [[Inspirational]] or having [[Free Expression]].
* *Pitt*: The next major upgrade will be on the side of software. The code of the next major release is starting to take shape, but is still far from being considered even beta. Focusing on the requirements of our current project, the most prominent features will be:
** Restructuring the database: The combination of lots of pages on the one side, and many page versions on the other, will slow things down on the long run. Respective counter measures are being worked on.
** Localization: The ability to manage multiple languages of a page.
** Customization: Form and function should be more adaptable, and administrators should be able to make changes to the look & feel of the site without the help of the superuser. Keyword: navigation menu, [[http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/|CSS]].
** Additional user level: Instead of just two (''User'', ''Administrator''), three would be fine: ''User'', ''Operator'', ''Administrator''.
** TBC
== Organizational
* Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors.
* Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]].
== Content
* '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation?
** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer.
** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless.
*** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now.
===Level of detail
*'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away.
** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project.
** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) )
** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope
Version 38
Date: 2008-05-08 19:05:57 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Added comment on style sheet
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= Naming the Site
We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities.
* '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica).
* '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea.
= Site design
'''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Technical
* '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.)
* '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it...
* *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly.
** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
** *Pitt*: Just for the records: Last month, I descended into the vault of my [?ISP|Internet Service Provider] and upgraded the hard disk of the web server. There's now plenty of space for [[About|HermesWeb]], and we don't need to hold ourselves back anymore. This concerns those blessed with the [[Long-Winded]] ([[Enduring Constitution]]?) [[Virtue|virtue]] as well as those benefiting from being [[Inspirational]] or having [[Free Expression]].
* *Pitt*: The next major upgrade will be on the side of software. The code of the next major release is starting to take shape, but is still far from being considered even beta. Focusing on the requirements of our current project, the most prominent features will be:
** Restructuring the database: The combination of lots of pages on the one side, and many page versions on the other, will slow things down on the long run. Respective counter measures are being worked on.
** Localization: The ability to manage multiple languages of a page.
** Customization: Form and function should be more adaptable, and administrators should be able to make changes to the look & feel of the site without the help of the superuser. Keyword: navigation menu, [[http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/|CSS]].
** Additional user level: Instead of just two (''User'', ''Administrator''), three would be fine: ''User'', ''Operator'', ''Administrator''.
** TBC
** '''Andrew''' Just a remark, I tried logging in to the site from my Palm Pilot and it was hard to read. It may be possible to revise the default style sheet to help with this. Is there a way to change the style sheet within Pie?
== Organizational
* Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors.
* Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]].
== Content
* '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation?
** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer.
** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless.
*** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now.
===Level of detail
*'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away.
** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project.
** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) )
** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product.
=Copyright Issues
* '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y.
*** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission.
*** '''Andrew''': I guess an exception would be if an Atlas Games employee with authority to make such decisions were to post copyrighted material here (with an appropriate notice). We'd be glad to accept anything Atlas wants to contribute, but as we agreed above, let's not pester Atlas with requests.
Version 39
Date: 2008-05-08 20:52:53 GMT Author: pm Comment: On style sheets
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= Naming the Site
We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities.
* '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica).
* '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea.
= Site design
'''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Technical
* '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.)
* '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it...
* *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly.
** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
** *Pitt*: Just for the records: Last month, I descended into the vault of my [?ISP|Internet Service Provider] and upgraded the hard disk of the web server. There's now plenty of space for [[About|HermesWeb]], and we don't need to hold ourselves back anymore. This concerns those blessed with the [[Long-Winded]] ([[Enduring Constitution]]?) [[Virtue|virtue]] as well as those benefiting from being [[Inspirational]] or having [[Free Expression]].
* *Pitt*: The next major upgrade will be on the side of software. The code of the next major release is starting to take shape, but is still far from being considered even beta. Focusing on the requirements of our current project, the most prominent features will be:
** Restructuring the database: The combination of lots of pages on the one side, and many page versions on the other, will slow things down on the long run. Respective counter measures are being worked on.
** Localization: The ability to manage multiple languages of a page.
** Customization: Form and function should be more adaptable, and administrators should be able to make changes to the look & feel of the site without the help of the superuser. Keyword: navigation menu, [[http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/|CSS]].
** Additional user level: Instead of just two (''User'', ''Administrator''), three would be fine: ''User'', ''Operator'', ''Administrator''.
** TBC
** '''Andrew''' Just a remark, I tried logging in to the site from my Palm Pilot and it was hard to read. It may be possible to revise the default style sheet to help with this. Is there a way to change the style sheet within Pie?
*** *Pitt*: Pie uses four different style sheets � one that is shared among all modes of operation, one printer specific, one for Browse mode, and one for Edit mode. The latter two specifically apply to [@screen] media, which may be inappropriate for PDA-sized displays. If you consider the PDA-support imperative, there are two (maybe more) solutions to this problem.
# If you tell me what media type the web browser of Palm OS relies on (if it isn't [@screen]), I could write a separate style sheet for it.
# We could adapt the existing style sheets to work for your Pilot. This is a little tricky, because supporting more exotic (like lynx, links) or older (like IE 5, NS4) platforms tends to result in drawbacks for the rest of the world, let alone the incompatibilities that we might face along the way, and that would have to be solved and circumvented.
** *Pitt*: Pie uses four different style sheets � one that is shared among all modes of operation, one printer specific, one for Browse mode, and one for Edit mode. The latter two specifically apply to [@screen] media, which may be inappropriate for PDA-sized displays. If you consider the PDA-support imperative, there are two (maybe more) solutions to this problem.
# If you tell me what media type the web browser of Palm OS relies on (if it isn't [@screen]), I could write a separate style sheet for it.
# We could adapt the existing style sheets to work for your Pilot. This is a little tricky, because supporting more exotic (like lynx, links) or older (like IE 5, NS4) platforms tends to result in drawbacks for the rest of the world, let alone the incompatibilities that we might face along the way, and that would have to be solved and circumvented.
== Organizational
* Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors.
* Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]].
== Content
* '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation?
** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer.
** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless.
*** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now.
===Level of detail
*'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away.
** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project.
** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) )
** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product.
=Copyright Issues
* '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyrig
Version 40
Date: 2008-05-12 12:38:43 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: On style sheets
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= Naming the Site
We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities.
* '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica).
* '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea.
= Site design
'''Andrew''': It occurs to me we might want to have a "Fan Community" button on the navigation pane at left, in addition to the buttons that already are there.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Technical
* '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.)
* '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it...
* *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly.
** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
** *Pitt*: Just for the records: Last month, I descended into the vault of my [?ISP|Internet Service Provider] and upgraded the hard disk of the web server. There's now plenty of space for [[About|HermesWeb]], and we don't need to hold ourselves back anymore. This concerns those blessed with the [[Long-Winded]] ([[Enduring Constitution]]?) [[Virtue|virtue]] as well as those benefiting from being [[Inspirational]] or having [[Free Expression]].
* *Pitt*: The next major upgrade will be on the side of software. The code of the next major release is starting to take shape, but is still far from being considered even beta. Focusing on the requirements of our current project, the most prominent features will be:
** Restructuring the database: The combination of lots of pages on the one side, and many page versions on the other, will slow things down on the long run. Respective counter measures are being worked on.
** Localization: The ability to manage multiple languages of a page.
** Customization: Form and function should be more adaptable, and administrators should be able to make changes to the look & feel of the site without the help of the superuser. Keyword: navigation menu, [[http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/|CSS]].
** Additional user level: Instead of just two (''User'', ''Administrator''), three would be fine: ''User'', ''Operator'', ''Administrator''.
** TBC
** '''Andrew''' Just a remark, I tried logging in to the site from my Palm Pilot and it was hard to read. It may be possible to revise the default style sheet to help with this. Is there a way to change the style sheet within Pie?
*** *Pitt*: Pie uses four different style sheets � one that is shared among all modes of operation, one printer specific, one for Browse mode, and one for Edit mode. The latter two specifically apply to [@screen] media, which may be inappropriate for PDA-sized displays. If you consider the PDA-support imperative, there are two (maybe more) solutions to this problem.
# If you tell me what media type the web browser of Palm OS relies on (if it isn't [@screen]), I could write a separate style sheet for it.
# We could adapt the existing style sheets to work for your Pilot. This is a little tricky, because supporting more exotic (like lynx, links) or older (like IE 5, NS4) platforms tends to result in drawbacks for the rest of the world, let alone the incompatibilities that we might face along the way, and that would have to be solved and circumvented.
*** I wouldn't say the style sheet is a high priority. To answer your question, the Palm uses the screen meedia type, and therein lies the problem: its screen is about 7 cm wide, not 30. It seems increasingly common for Web sites to require a certain minimum screen width, and that's inconvenient to users who want to use a small screen or simply to use a narrow window (as when viewing two windows side by side). This is more of a personal preference than anything. As I said, it's low priority, and we can continue the discussion by e-mail.
** I wouldn't say the style sheet is a high priority. To answer your question, the Palm uses the screen meedia type, and therein lies the problem: its screen is about 7 cm wide, not 30. It seems increasingly common for Web sites to require a certain minimum screen width, and that's inconvenient to users who want to use a small screen or simply to use a narrow window (as when viewing two windows side by side). This is more of a personal preference than anything. As I said, it's low priority, and we can continue the discussion by e-mail.
== Organizational
* Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors.
* Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]].
== Content
* '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation?
** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer.
** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless.
*** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now.
===Level of detail
*'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away.
** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project.
** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) )
** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product.
=Copyright Issues
* '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y.
*** '''Yai
Version 41
Date: 2008-12-29 13:34:36 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Updated site design discussion
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= Naming the Site
We have settled on HermesWeb as a working name for this site, but we are open to other possibilities.
* '''Yair''': how about a proper Latin version of "Compendia Magica", or "Project Harco" (to designate something between Project Redcap and the Durenmar site), or "The Lyceum" (as a place to learn about Ars Magica).
* '''Andrew''': HarcoWeb is another idea.
= Site design
'''Andrew''': The current task I think is most important is getting the navigation topics worked out. The [[Overview]] page is now a work in progress capturing the current draft navigation system.g the current draft navigation system.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Technical
* '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.)
* '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it...
* *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly.
** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
** *Pitt*: Just for the records: Last month, I descended into the vault of my [?ISP|Internet Service Provider] and upgraded the hard disk of the web server. There's now plenty of space for [[About|HermesWeb]], and we don't need to hold ourselves back anymore. This concerns those blessed with the [[Long-Winded]] ([[Enduring Constitution]]?) [[Virtue|virtue]] as well as those benefiting from being [[Inspirational]] or having [[Free Expression]].
* *Pitt*: The next major upgrade will be on the side of software. The code of the next major release is starting to take shape, but is still far from being considered even beta. Focusing on the requirements of our current project, the most prominent features will be:
** Restructuring the database: The combination of lots of pages on the one side, and many page versions on the other, will slow things down on the long run. Respective counter measures are being worked on.
** Localization: The ability to manage multiple languages of a page.
** Customization: Form and function should be more adaptable, and administrators should be able to make changes to the look & feel of the site without the help of the superuser. Keyword: navigation menu, [[http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/|CSS]].
** Additional user level: Instead of just two (''User'', ''Administrator''), three would be fine: ''User'', ''Operator'', ''Administrator''.
** TBC
** '''Andrew''' Just a remark, I tried logging in to the site from my Palm Pilot and it was hard to read. It may be possible to revise the default style sheet to help with this. Is there a way to change the style sheet within Pie?
*** *Pitt*: Pie uses four different style sheets � one that is shared among all modes of operation, one printer specific, one for Browse mode, and one for Edit mode. The latter two specifically apply to [@screen] media, which may be inappropriate for PDA-sized displays. If you consider the PDA-support imperative, there are two (maybe more) solutions to this problem.
# If you tell me what media type the web browser of Palm OS relies on (if it isn't [@screen]), I could write a separate style sheet for it.
# We could adapt the existing style sheets to work for your Pilot. This is a little tricky, because supporting more exotic (like lynx, links) or older (like IE 5, NS4) platforms tends to result in drawbacks for the rest of the world, let alone the incompatibilities that we might face along the way, and that would have to be solved and circumvented.
*** I wouldn't say the style sheet is a high priority. To answer your question, the Palm uses the screen meedia type, and therein lies the problem: its screen is about 7 cm wide, not 30. It seems increasingly common for Web sites to require a certain minimum screen width, and that's inconvenient to users who want to use a small screen or simply to use a narrow window (as when viewing two windows side by side). This is more of a personal preference than anything. As I said, it's low priority, and we can continue the discussion by e-mail.
== Organizational
* Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors.
* Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]].
== Content
* '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation?
** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer.
** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless.
*** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now.
===Level of detail
*'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away.
** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project.
** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) )
** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product.
=Copyright Issues
* '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y.
*** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission.
*** '''Andrew''': I guess an exception would be if an Atlas Games employee with authority to make such decisions were to post copyrighted material here (with an appropriate notice). We'd be glad to accept anything Atlas wants to contribute, but as we agreed above,
Version 42
Date: 2008-12-29 13:37:35 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Removed "naming the site"; added "e-mail list"
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to [@mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org] with the word [_subsribe hermesweb] in the subject line.
is now a work in progress capturing the current draft navigation system.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Technical
* '''Andrew:''' I'm going to test the ability to add and delete accounts. Adding works... and so does deletion. (I created a user account called RedShirtGrog then deleted it and proved I couldn't log back in.)
* '''Yair''': Is there a way to see which pages contain a particular borken link? For example, if I see that 3 pages are pointing to the required resource [[Artes Liberales]], can I see which 3 pages do so? If the page exists I can go to it and look at the Referers, but if it doesn't it seems I need to create it to look who refers to it...
* *Yair*: How large is the space available to us here? A repository of maps can eat up a lot of megabytes very quickly.
** *Pitt*: Concerning available space: If I'd reveil to you the fact that the server platform with its more than a dozen of network services is built around a sedated SPARC with a 4[_]GB hard drive only, from which about 800[_]MB are assigned as web space for an equal number of virtual hosts, you would be right to call that antiquated, so I would rather like to keep this fact an unspoken secret. However, unless you start to upload high resolution video files, the remaining capacity should suffice to hold a couple of [[Tribunal]] maps, hand-drawn [[Houses of Hermes|house symbols]] or [[Vis]] tokens, and whatnot. If you are familiar with media formats, you can easily optimize your output in regard of saving disk space (and thus download time) without losing (too much) quality. I could put together some guidelines of how to do that best, once I know how you want the images to look like. If the project continues to develop and grow at the current rate, I could even be persuaded to grow up a little as well to live up to 21['st] century standards. I won't let the project stagnate because of hardware limitations.
** *Pitt*: Just for the records: Last month, I descended into the vault of my [?ISP|Internet Service Provider] and upgraded the hard disk of the web server. There's now plenty of space for [[About|HermesWeb]], and we don't need to hold ourselves back anymore. This concerns those blessed with the [[Long-Winded]] ([[Enduring Constitution]]?) [[Virtue|virtue]] as well as those benefiting from being [[Inspirational]] or having [[Free Expression]].
* *Pitt*: The next major upgrade will be on the side of software. The code of the next major release is starting to take shape, but is still far from being considered even beta. Focusing on the requirements of our current project, the most prominent features will be:
** Restructuring the database: The combination of lots of pages on the one side, and many page versions on the other, will slow things down on the long run. Respective counter measures are being worked on.
** Localization: The ability to manage multiple languages of a page.
** Customization: Form and function should be more adaptable, and administrators should be able to make changes to the look & feel of the site without the help of the superuser. Keyword: navigation menu, [[http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/|CSS]].
** Additional user level: Instead of just two (''User'', ''Administrator''), three would be fine: ''User'', ''Operator'', ''Administrator''.
** TBC
** '''Andrew''' Just a remark, I tried logging in to the site from my Palm Pilot and it was hard to read. It may be possible to revise the default style sheet to help with this. Is there a way to change the style sheet within Pie?
*** *Pitt*: Pie uses four different style sheets � one that is shared among all modes of operation, one printer specific, one for Browse mode, and one for Edit mode. The latter two specifically apply to [@screen] media, which may be inappropriate for PDA-sized displays. If you consider the PDA-support imperative, there are two (maybe more) solutions to this problem.
# If you tell me what media type the web browser of Palm OS relies on (if it isn't [@screen]), I could write a separate style sheet for it.
# We could adapt the existing style sheets to work for your Pilot. This is a little tricky, because supporting more exotic (like lynx, links) or older (like IE 5, NS4) platforms tends to result in drawbacks for the rest of the world, let alone the incompatibilities that we might face along the way, and that would have to be solved and circumvented.
*** I wouldn't say the style sheet is a high priority. To answer your question, the Palm uses the screen meedia type, and therein lies the problem: its screen is about 7 cm wide, not 30. It seems increasingly common for Web sites to require a certain minimum screen width, and that's inconvenient to users who want to use a small screen or simply to use a narrow window (as when viewing two windows side by side). This is more of a personal preference than anything. As I said, it's low priority, and we can continue the discussion by e-mail.
== Organizational
* Start promoting the site to the community and gradually seeking new contributors.
* Continue refining [[Policy]] and [[Contributing|contributors' guidelines]].
== Content
* '''Yair'': I do think a Tribunal-boundary map will greatly add to the entry, though. Would making ones from public domain maps be appropriate? Or would that still constitute a copyright violation?
** '''Andrew''': As I understand it, copyright applies to verbatim copies, not reproducing similar things from scratch. So IMO it would be permissible to make our own Tribunal map. At first I was wondering whether it's really important enough to make our own. I've come to the conclusion that it would be great, especially if we could do something fancy like make a clickable image map of the Tribunals of Mythic Europe. This also makes me think a repository of fan-created maps would be a good thing. I have a couple I made with Campaign Cartographer.
** *Pitt*: You could link to the [[http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/europemap.pdf|official map]] as an external resource. However, the map, being a PDF, is not that useful for direct linking, but rather serves the purpose as a reference you download and consult as the case arises. Unless you want to provide a map for that case, bitmap graphics would be much more convenient for immediate media integration. It shouldn't be too hard to draw a map based on historical maps that take into account historical details, such as the coast line in 1220 A.D., and then release the artwork under [[http://creativecommons.org/|CC]], or a similar license type. I did that myself with maps of multiple scales, but these maps are mostly general or tactical in nature, and lack the context of an [[Ars Magica]] handout. On the other hand, they proved useful in [[Ars Magica]] sessions without the imposed context, nevertheless.
*** *Andrew*: I have the tools and the skillz to make a Tribunal map. What I lack is the time to do it. Maybe a couple of months from now.
===Level of detail
*'''Yair''': How much detail do we want covering books? There is [[Houses of Hermes Mystery Cults|very little]] detail, a [[Houses of Hermes: Societates| medium level]] of detail, or [[Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults|a small review]] level of detail. I'm leaning towards the more-is-better approach, to give the reader the benefit of the community's - or at least writer's - experience with the product. However, I'm worried that this may intrude into too-much information, serving as a poor-man's version of the book by giving the ideas (even if not the mechanics) away.
** *Pitt*: Bulleted lists vs. continuous text: Both variants have their pros and cons. For a brief overview, just naming the canonical [[Covenant]]s might be enough. However, a list or even a dedicated sub section for each item allows for more information to be conveyed where such trivia is available. This arises the question of _how much_ should be said about canonical contents. Reveiling too many details might lead to copyright issues. For instance, in this particular case, would it be wise to talk about the relationship between [[Durenmar]] and [[Dankmar]], two [[Covenant]]s that have quite a reputation, or would that be beyond the scope of this project.
** *Yair*: I think that it defeats the point of a wiki to add much detail when a link offers you all the detail you need. The page on the Rhine Tribunal should just list the two covenants. The question you raise, however, is very relevant to all pages. I posted a question about that myself, above, starting with "How much detail...". I think the level of detail should be such as to not serve as a substitute for the product, but I'm worried that giving, e.g., the idea that Dankmar is an opponent of Durenmar residing in the same Black Forest and in league with the Forest Spirit might really be giving an excellent idea away. (In other words - I don't really know ;-) )
** *Andrew*: This is the central question of this project, IMO. I think the fact that Durenmar and Dankmar are adversaries is exactly the sort of thing we want to say. The details of that rivalry, though, (why they are adversaries and what they do to each other) should be something people look up in GotF. What I would hope for this site is that it can provide a nice overview of canon, cross-referenced and easy to search, that I can browse looking for cool things to use in my game. Getting the full details of those cool things, of course, will require buying an Atlas Games product.
=Copyright Issues
* '''Andrew''': As a matter of policy I think we should just stay away from posting copyrighted material. Just to be clear: fair use in U.S. law means "the copyright holder can't stop you even if they want to," not "the copyright holder doesn't object." The requirements for fair use are relatively stringent. We could probably get permission to use some stuff but that raises another issue: namely, we ought not to make a nuisance of ourselves, pestering [[John Nephew]] and [[David Chart]] with requests for permission to use X or Y.
*** '''Yair''': As a matter of policy, I guess your suggestion makes the most sense as it's easiest to apply - *we should stay away from posting any copyrighted material*. This will also cut down on our need to bother Atlas with requests for permission.
*** '''Andrew''': I guess an exception would be if an Atlas Games employee with authority to make such decisions were to post copyrighted material here (with an appropriate notice). We'd be glad to accept anything Atlas wants to contribute, but as we agreed above, let's not pester Atlas with requests.
Version 43
Date: 2009-06-20 16:45:14 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Deleted last year's tasks. Updated to HermesWeb 2 tasks,
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = E-Mail List We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the word __subsribe hermesweb__ in the subject line. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = Development Plans We are in the process of migrating the site to the new version of Pie. Probably as soon as that migration process is complete, we will move HermesWeb 2 to the address www.redcap.org and it will become the permanent replacement for the old Project: Redcap page. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. ==Categories The new version of Pie uses categories to help users browse and search pages. Every page should have at least one category. A page can belong to more than one category. As a suggestion, if it is not too late, I would prefer to call these "topics" rather than categories. The word "category" seems to me to imply that every items fits into exactly one category, whereas the word "topic" doesn't to me imply a strict hierarchy. However if it's not convenient to rename the concept, my concern can be address through the writer's guidelines. Here are some categories I would suggest: # HermesWeb Project (pages about the project: news, administration, policies, user documentation and so on) # ArM1 # ArM2 # ArM3 # ArM4 # ArM5 # Products # Mythic Europe # Order of Hermes # Rules # Fan-Created Content # Fan Community # House Rules # Characters # Covenants # Creatures # Spells # Enchanted Items # Real History == Templates Templates can help improve the consistency of the site's look and feel. This is more than just cosmetics: it helps the eye quickly scan the page for information one is looking for. Current usability research indicates a user looks at a page for less than 5 seconds in order to evaluate whether it contains the information he wants. Presenting things in a clear, consistent format will improve the _impression_ of usefulness. I have created and attached several page templates: [[ArM_General_Template.txt]] [[Rules_Reference_Template.txt]] [[ArM_Brief_Template.txt]] (for brief pages of only a few paragraphs) [[Product_Description_Template.txt]] I also think it would be a good idea to create a template for covenants and characters but I haven't made them yet.
Version 44
Date: 2009-06-21 22:42:19 GMT Author: pm Comment: File rendered accessible.
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the word __subsribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= Development Plans
We are in the process of migrating the site to the new version of Pie. Probably as soon as that migration process is complete, we will move HermesWeb 2 to the address www.redcap.org and it will become the permanent replacement for the old Project: Redcap page.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Categories
The new version of Pie uses categories to help users browse and search pages. Every page should have at least one category. A page can belong to more than one category.
As a suggestion, if it is not too late, I would prefer to call these "topics" rather than categories. The word "category" seems to me to imply that every items fits into exactly one category, whereas the word "topic" doesn't to me imply a strict hierarchy. However if it's not convenient to rename the concept, my concern can be address through the writer's guidelines.
Here are some categories I would suggest:
# HermesWeb Project (pages about the project: news, administration, policies, user documentation and so on)
# ArM1
# ArM2
# ArM3
# ArM4
# ArM5
# Products
# Mythic Europe
# Order of Hermes
# Rules
# Fan-Created Content
# Fan Community
# House Rules
# Characters
# Covenants
# Creatures
# Spells
# Enchanted Items
# Real History
== Templates
Templates can help improve the consistency of the site's look and feel. This is more than just cosmetics: it helps the eye quickly scan the page for information one is looking for. Current usability research indicates a user looks at a page for less than 5 seconds in order to evaluate whether it contains the information he wants. Presenting things in a clear, consistent format will improve the _impression_ of usefulness.
I have created and attached several page templates:
* {{file|ArM_General_Template.txt}}
* {{file|Rules_Reference_Template.txt}}
* {{file|ArM_Brief_Template.txt}} (for brief pages of only a few paragraphs)
* {{file|Product_Description_Template.txt}}
I also think it would be a good idea to create a template for covenants and characters but I haven't made them yet.
Version 45
Date: 2009-06-25 23:33:42 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Revised the categories
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the word __subsribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= Development Plans
We are in the process of migrating the site to the new version of Pie. Probably as soon as that migration process is complete, we will move HermesWeb 2 to the address www.redcap.org and it will become the permanent replacement for the old Project: Redcap page.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Categories
The new version of Pie uses categories to help users browse and search pages. Every page should have at least one category. A page can belong to more than one category.
As a suggestion, if it is not too late, I would prefer to call these "topics" rather than categories. The word "category" seems to me to imply that every items fits into exactly one category, whereas the word "topic" doesn't to me imply a strict hierarchy. However if it's not convenient to rename the concept, my concern can be address through the writer's guidelines.
Here are some categories I would suggest:
# HermesWeb Project (pages about the project: news, administration, policies, user documentation and so on)
# ArM1
# ArM2
# ArM3
# ArM4
# ArM5
# Products
# Authors
# Fan-Created
# Mythic Europe
# Order of Hermes
# Rules
# Characters
# Covenants
# Spells and Enchantments
# Real History
# Community
# Stories
# Virtues and Flaws
== Templates
Templates can help improve the consistency of the site's look and feel. This is more than just cosmetics: it helps the eye quickly scan the page for information one is looking for. Current usability research indicates a user looks at a page for less than 5 seconds in order to evaluate whether it contains the information he wants. Presenting things in a clear, consistent format will improve the _impression_ of usefulness.
I have created and attached several page templates:
* {{file|ArM_General_Template.txt}}
* {{file|Rules_Reference_Template.txt}}
* {{file|ArM_Brief_Template.txt}} (for brief pages of only a few paragraphs)
* {{file|Product_Description_Template.txt}}
I also think it would be a good idea to create a template for covenants and characters but I haven't made them yet.
Version 46
Date: 2009-06-25 23:34:35 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Added Advice category
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the word __subsribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= Development Plans
We are in the process of migrating the site to the new version of Pie. Probably as soon as that migration process is complete, we will move HermesWeb 2 to the address www.redcap.org and it will become the permanent replacement for the old Project: Redcap page.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Categories
The new version of Pie uses categories to help users browse and search pages. Every page should have at least one category. A page can belong to more than one category.
As a suggestion, if it is not too late, I would prefer to call these "topics" rather than categories. The word "category" seems to me to imply that every items fits into exactly one category, whereas the word "topic" doesn't to me imply a strict hierarchy. However if it's not convenient to rename the concept, my concern can be address through the writer's guidelines.
Here are some categories I would suggest:
# HermesWeb Project (pages about the project: news, administration, policies, user documentation and so on)
# ArM1
# ArM2
# ArM3
# ArM4
# ArM5
# Products
# Authors
# Fan-Created
# Mythic Europe
# Order of Hermes
# Rules
# Characters
# Covenants
# Spells and Enchantments
# Real History
# Community
# Stories
# Virtues and Flaws
# Advice
== Templates
Templates can help improve the consistency of the site's look and feel. This is more than just cosmetics: it helps the eye quickly scan the page for information one is looking for. Current usability research indicates a user looks at a page for less than 5 seconds in order to evaluate whether it contains the information he wants. Presenting things in a clear, consistent format will improve the _impression_ of usefulness.
I have created and attached several page templates:
* {{file|ArM_General_Template.txt}}
* {{file|Rules_Reference_Template.txt}}
* {{file|ArM_Brief_Template.txt}} (for brief pages of only a few paragraphs)
* {{file|Product_Description_Template.txt}}
I also think it would be a good idea to create a template for covenants and characters but I haven't made them yet.
Version 47
Date: 2009-06-26 00:04:14 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Simplified suggested categories
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the word __subsribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Administrative Roles and Titles
* [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]].
* [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor
* [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist)
Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required.
= Development Plans
We are in the process of migrating the site to the new version of Pie. Probably as soon as that migration process is complete, we will move HermesWeb 2 to the address www.redcap.org and it will become the permanent replacement for the old Project: Redcap page.
= To-Do List
Here is a running commentary on current tasks.
==Categories
The new version of Pie uses categories to help users browse and search pages. Every page should have at least one category. A page can belong to more than one category.
As a suggestion, if it is not too late, I would prefer to call these "topics" rather than categories. The word "category" seems to me to imply that every items fits into exactly one category, whereas the word "topic" doesn't to me imply a strict hierarchy. However if it's not convenient to rename the concept, my concern can be address through the writer's guidelines.
Here are some categories I would suggest:
# ArM1
# ArM2
# ArM3
# ArM4
# ArM5
# Canon
# Fan Created
# HermesWeb Project (pages about the project: news, administration, policies, user documentation and so on)
# Rules
# Publications & Authors
# How To
# Community
== Templates
Templates can help improve the consistency of the site's look and feel. This is more than just cosmetics: it helps the eye quickly scan the page for information one is looking for. Current usability research indicates a user looks at a page for less than 5 seconds in order to evaluate whether it contains the information he wants. Presenting things in a clear, consistent format will improve the _impression_ of usefulness.
I have created and attached several page templates:
* {{file|ArM_General_Template.txt}}
* {{file|Rules_Reference_Template.txt}}
* {{file|ArM_Brief_Template.txt}} (for brief pages of only a few paragraphs)
* {{file|Product_Description_Template.txt}}
I also think it would be a good idea to create a template for covenants and characters but I haven't made them yet.
Version 48
Date: 2009-06-26 00:21:48 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Deleted links to old attachments of templates
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors. = E-Mail List We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the word __subsribe hermesweb__ in the subject line. = Administrative Roles and Titles * [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|Pitt Murmann]]: Site administrator, [[http://pie.ekkaia.org/|Pie]] architect, [[http://gt.ekkaia.org/page/Pitt_Murmann|web grog]]. * [[Andrew Gronosky]]: Atlas Games liason, unlicensed legal advisor, copyright Hoplite, and proofreading Quaesitor * [[Yair]]: Content Archmage (Creo specialist) Anyone else is free to invent and claim a role. No minimum Art scores required. = Development Plans We are in the process of migrating the site to the new version of Pie. Probably as soon as that migration process is complete, we will move HermesWeb 2 to the address www.redcap.org and it will become the permanent replacement for the old Project: Redcap page. = To-Do List Here is a running commentary on current tasks. ==Categories The new version of Pie uses categories to help users browse and search pages. Every page should have at least one category. A page can belong to more than one category. As a suggestion, if it is not too late, I would prefer to call these "topics" rather than categories. The word "category" seems to me to imply that every items fits into exactly one category, whereas the word "topic" doesn't to me imply a strict hierarchy. However if it's not convenient to rename the concept, my concern can be address through the writer's guidelines. Here are some categories I would suggest: # ArM1 # ArM2 # ArM3 # ArM4 # ArM5 # Canon # Fan Created # HermesWeb Project (pages about the project: news, administration, policies, user documentation and so on) # Rules # Publications & Authors # How To # Community == Templates Templates can help improve the consistency of the site's look and feel. This is more than just cosmetics: it helps the eye quickly scan the page for information one is looking for. Current usability research indicates a user looks at a page for less than 5 seconds in order to evaluate whether it contains the information he wants. Presenting things in a clear, consistent format will improve the _impression_ of usefulness. I've created a few templates but we could always use more. You can view, edit, and add templates via the Moderation -> Templates menu option. -- Andrew
Version 49
Date: 2010-02-22 00:13:45 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment:
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
Version 50
Date: 2010-02-22 00:51:34 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: The organization and design questions Pitt raised on the mailing list
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Threshold/Transition (between Scope and Namespace & Nomenclature)
{{quote|I'm persistent. I'd like to revisit the dictionary thought. A wiki page is supposed to be expressed by its name, that is, the name it is referred to by other pages. There are numerous exceptions regarding feature-rich topics, but my general preference is to keep the average page relatively short, include links to other pages, and leave the more extensive sub topics to the linked pages to explain - divide et impera, by recursion. If, for example, I write an article about Troupe-Style Play, and want to explain the differences to a traditional, competitive GM vs. players scenario, I'd probably mention the role of the story guide and players, but any extensive coverage of the story guide would be a waste of time. Rather, the story guide deserves his own page, which can be easily maintained and extended, and, more importantly, linked by other pages.}}
Agreed, this is the way most of our pages ought to be designed. The [[Writers Guidelines]] page (or something like it) should be updated to express this idea.
There will be a few exceptions, for lengthy articles or pages where it makes sense to collect together a large amount of information. For example, most of our topic pages such as [[Welcome to Ars Magica]] and [[Order of Hermes]] will be big. But, 90% of our articles should be short -- a few paragraphs with some links and references.
{{cite| Andrew G.}}
== Namespace & Nomenclature
{{quote|In the context of a dictionary, any ambiguity caused by an undefined scope is likely to lead to a confusingly arranged archipelago of information whose assignment of contents is not only random at best, but whose nodes are also insufficiently accessible by the visitor who wants to find and read them. I'd like to note that we found a pretty good solution for the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, where * is one of the twelve Hermetic houses, and eventually created a reasonable bijective mapping of all information involved, yielding 3 times 12 distinctive pages.
What I'm trying to say is that, under the premise of a wiki, it is imperative to have a clearly structured nomenclature, one that more or less stands for itself, and one that can be used to comfortably retrieve the information contained in it. A wiki is not only about "use it, share it, contribute" - we could have that with a forum as well. It is also about structure.}}
I think the page categories help to make the information discoverable. Nomenclature in general is something that we should address on the "How to Use this Site" page, which doesn't yet exist.
In addition to the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, I think nomenclature issues occur in the titles of Ars Magica supplements: for instance, there are two supplements titled ''Covenants'' (one for 5th Edition and one for 2nd). We should straighten it out with a consistent solution. Pitt, I think you have more experience with this than I do. Can you make any specific suggestions?
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Navigation
{{quote|When I'm consulted to design navigational mechanisms of web sites, I usually try to go for a 2-action limit, meaning that it must not take a visitor more than two actions to find what he's looking for, provided that
* he knows what he's looking for,
* what he's looking for exists somewhere on the site,
* the retrieval key to the final result is appropriate.
The first two points should be self explanatory. A unique key yields a result in just one action. In the context of a wiki, page name -> content mapping performs a 1-action navigation. If I know the name of a page, I can evoke it through a single page search action, or by following a single hyperlink.
An "appropriate" key, on the other hand, means some sort of partial information that differs from a unique key in that, when applied in the first action, it does not take the user more than one additional action to retrieve the final result. In our wiki, a partial match of a page name, or a category/tag match both take me to a preselection of matching candidates from which I can choose by performing a second action, a final click. However, this concept works only for clearly defined namespaces, and/or properly assigned categories. That's why it is so important to have a clearly defined nomenclature in a defined scope. Right now, we already have lots of contents, but are only half way to a suitable solution for uniform information retrieval. }}
Version 51
Date: 2010-02-22 00:57:25 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Andrew G's response to navigation discussion
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Threshold/Transition (between Scope and Namespace & Nomenclature)
{{quote|I'm persistent. I'd like to revisit the dictionary thought. A wiki page is supposed to be expressed by its name, that is, the name it is referred to by other pages. There are numerous exceptions regarding feature-rich topics, but my general preference is to keep the average page relatively short, include links to other pages, and leave the more extensive sub topics to the linked pages to explain - divide et impera, by recursion. If, for example, I write an article about Troupe-Style Play, and want to explain the differences to a traditional, competitive GM vs. players scenario, I'd probably mention the role of the story guide and players, but any extensive coverage of the story guide would be a waste of time. Rather, the story guide deserves his own page, which can be easily maintained and extended, and, more importantly, linked by other pages.}}
Agreed, this is the way most of our pages ought to be designed. The [[Writers Guidelines]] page (or something like it) should be updated to express this idea.
There will be a few exceptions, for lengthy articles or pages where it makes sense to collect together a large amount of information. For example, most of our topic pages such as [[Welcome to Ars Magica]] and [[Order of Hermes]] will be big. But, 90% of our articles should be short -- a few paragraphs with some links and references.
{{cite| Andrew G.}}
== Namespace & Nomenclature
{{quote|In the context of a dictionary, any ambiguity caused by an undefined scope is likely to lead to a confusingly arranged archipelago of information whose assignment of contents is not only random at best, but whose nodes are also insufficiently accessible by the visitor who wants to find and read them. I'd like to note that we found a pretty good solution for the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, where * is one of the twelve Hermetic houses, and eventually created a reasonable bijective mapping of all information involved, yielding 3 times 12 distinctive pages.
What I'm trying to say is that, under the premise of a wiki, it is imperative to have a clearly structured nomenclature, one that more or less stands for itself, and one that can be used to comfortably retrieve the information contained in it. A wiki is not only about "use it, share it, contribute" - we could have that with a forum as well. It is also about structure.}}
I think the page categories help to make the information discoverable. Nomenclature in general is something that we should address on the "How to Use this Site" page, which doesn't yet exist.
In addition to the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, I think nomenclature issues occur in the titles of Ars Magica supplements: for instance, there are two supplements titled ''Covenants'' (one for 5th Edition and one for 2nd). We should straighten it out with a consistent solution. Pitt, I think you have more experience with this than I do. Can you make any specific suggestions?
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Navigation
{{quote|When I'm consulted to design navigational mechanisms of web sites, I usually try to go for a 2-action limit, meaning that it must not take a visitor more than two actions to find what he's looking for, provided that
* he knows what he's looking for,
* what he's looking for exists somewhere on the site,
* the retrieval key to the final result is appropriate.
The first two points should be self explanatory. A unique key yields a result in just one action. In the context of a wiki, page name -> content mapping performs a 1-action navigation. If I know the name of a page, I can evoke it through a single page search action, or by following a single hyperlink.
An "appropriate" key, on the other hand, means some sort of partial information that differs from a unique key in that, when applied in the first action, it does not take the user more than one additional action to retrieve the final result. In our wiki, a partial match of a page name, or a category/tag match both take me to a preselection of matching candidates from which I can choose by performing a second action, a final click. However, this concept works only for clearly defined namespaces, and/or properly assigned categories. That's why it is so important to have a clearly defined nomenclature in a defined scope. Right now, we already have lots of contents, but are only half way to a suitable solution for uniform information retrieval. }}
The two-action limit makes sense and is consistent with what theory I've read about usability. This is why it is better in some cases to have big, complicated pages with many related things in one place. (The table of contents feature is important in that case).
It seems to me that we have two sorts of categories: categories that apply to things within the game world (such as Domus Magnae, the Hermetic Houses, etc.) and categories that matter to gamers (published books, authors, editions, "fluff" vs. "crunch").
So I'd welcome a bit more thought and discussion about categories and nomenclature, and it would be good to capture that discussion on a page somewhere.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
Version 52
Date: 2010-03-10 10:32:09 GMT Author: Yair Comment: an Author category?
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Threshold/Transition (between Scope and Namespace & Nomenclature)
{{quote|I'm persistent. I'd like to revisit the dictionary thought. A wiki page is supposed to be expressed by its name, that is, the name it is referred to by other pages. There are numerous exceptions regarding feature-rich topics, but my general preference is to keep the average page relatively short, include links to other pages, and leave the more extensive sub topics to the linked pages to explain - divide et impera, by recursion. If, for example, I write an article about Troupe-Style Play, and want to explain the differences to a traditional, competitive GM vs. players scenario, I'd probably mention the role of the story guide and players, but any extensive coverage of the story guide would be a waste of time. Rather, the story guide deserves his own page, which can be easily maintained and extended, and, more importantly, linked by other pages.}}
Agreed, this is the way most of our pages ought to be designed. The [[Writers Guidelines]] page (or something like it) should be updated to express this idea.
There will be a few exceptions, for lengthy articles or pages where it makes sense to collect together a large amount of information. For example, most of our topic pages such as [[Welcome to Ars Magica]] and [[Order of Hermes]] will be big. But, 90% of our articles should be short -- a few paragraphs with some links and references.
{{cite| Andrew G.}}
== Namespace & Nomenclature
{{quote|In the context of a dictionary, any ambiguity caused by an undefined scope is likely to lead to a confusingly arranged archipelago of information whose assignment of contents is not only random at best, but whose nodes are also insufficiently accessible by the visitor who wants to find and read them. I'd like to note that we found a pretty good solution for the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, where * is one of the twelve Hermetic houses, and eventually created a reasonable bijective mapping of all information involved, yielding 3 times 12 distinctive pages.
What I'm trying to say is that, under the premise of a wiki, it is imperative to have a clearly structured nomenclature, one that more or less stands for itself, and one that can be used to comfortably retrieve the information contained in it. A wiki is not only about "use it, share it, contribute" - we could have that with a forum as well. It is also about structure.}}
I think the page categories help to make the information discoverable. Nomenclature in general is something that we should address on the "How to Use this Site" page, which doesn't yet exist.
In addition to the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, I think nomenclature issues occur in the titles of Ars Magica supplements: for instance, there are two supplements titled ''Covenants'' (one for 5th Edition and one for 2nd). We should straighten it out with a consistent solution. Pitt, I think you have more experience with this than I do. Can you make any specific suggestions?
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Navigation
{{quote|When I'm consulted to design navigational mechanisms of web sites, I usually try to go for a 2-action limit, meaning that it must not take a visitor more than two actions to find what he's looking for, provided that
* he knows what he's looking for,
* what he's looking for exists somewhere on the site,
* the retrieval key to the final result is appropriate.
The first two points should be self explanatory. A unique key yields a result in just one action. In the context of a wiki, page name -> content mapping performs a 1-action navigation. If I know the name of a page, I can evoke it through a single page search action, or by following a single hyperlink.
An "appropriate" key, on the other hand, means some sort of partial information that differs from a unique key in that, when applied in the first action, it does not take the user more than one additional action to retrieve the final result. In our wiki, a partial match of a page name, or a category/tag match both take me to a preselection of matching candidates from which I can choose by performing a second action, a final click. However, this concept works only for clearly defined namespaces, and/or properly assigned categories. That's why it is so important to have a clearly defined nomenclature in a defined scope. Right now, we already have lots of contents, but are only half way to a suitable solution for uniform information retrieval. }}
The two-action limit makes sense and is consistent with what theory I've read about usability. This is why it is better in some cases to have big, complicated pages with many related things in one place. (The table of contents feature is important in that case).
It seems to me that we have two sorts of categories: categories that apply to things within the game world (such as Domus Magnae, the Hermetic Houses, etc.) and categories that matter to gamers (published books, authors, editions, "fluff" vs. "crunch").
So I'd welcome a bit more thought and discussion about categories and nomenclature, and it would be good to capture that discussion on a page somewhere.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== A Category Suggestion
Many of the often-referred to pages are authors. I suggest a new category would be useful - "Author". This can be extended to "Line Contributor", to include people like the Line Editor.
{{cite|Yair R.}}
Version 53
Date: 2010-03-10 13:52:18 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Comment about Authors category
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Threshold/Transition (between Scope and Namespace & Nomenclature)
{{quote|I'm persistent. I'd like to revisit the dictionary thought. A wiki page is supposed to be expressed by its name, that is, the name it is referred to by other pages. There are numerous exceptions regarding feature-rich topics, but my general preference is to keep the average page relatively short, include links to other pages, and leave the more extensive sub topics to the linked pages to explain - divide et impera, by recursion. If, for example, I write an article about Troupe-Style Play, and want to explain the differences to a traditional, competitive GM vs. players scenario, I'd probably mention the role of the story guide and players, but any extensive coverage of the story guide would be a waste of time. Rather, the story guide deserves his own page, which can be easily maintained and extended, and, more importantly, linked by other pages.}}
Agreed, this is the way most of our pages ought to be designed. The [[Writers Guidelines]] page (or something like it) should be updated to express this idea.
There will be a few exceptions, for lengthy articles or pages where it makes sense to collect together a large amount of information. For example, most of our topic pages such as [[Welcome to Ars Magica]] and [[Order of Hermes]] will be big. But, 90% of our articles should be short -- a few paragraphs with some links and references.
{{cite| Andrew G.}}
== Namespace & Nomenclature
{{quote|In the context of a dictionary, any ambiguity caused by an undefined scope is likely to lead to a confusingly arranged archipelago of information whose assignment of contents is not only random at best, but whose nodes are also insufficiently accessible by the visitor who wants to find and read them. I'd like to note that we found a pretty good solution for the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, where * is one of the twelve Hermetic houses, and eventually created a reasonable bijective mapping of all information involved, yielding 3 times 12 distinctive pages.
What I'm trying to say is that, under the premise of a wiki, it is imperative to have a clearly structured nomenclature, one that more or less stands for itself, and one that can be used to comfortably retrieve the information contained in it. A wiki is not only about "use it, share it, contribute" - we could have that with a forum as well. It is also about structure.}}
I think the page categories help to make the information discoverable. Nomenclature in general is something that we should address on the "How to Use this Site" page, which doesn't yet exist.
In addition to the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, I think nomenclature issues occur in the titles of Ars Magica supplements: for instance, there are two supplements titled ''Covenants'' (one for 5th Edition and one for 2nd). We should straighten it out with a consistent solution. Pitt, I think you have more experience with this than I do. Can you make any specific suggestions?
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Navigation
{{quote|When I'm consulted to design navigational mechanisms of web sites, I usually try to go for a 2-action limit, meaning that it must not take a visitor more than two actions to find what he's looking for, provided that
* he knows what he's looking for,
* what he's looking for exists somewhere on the site,
* the retrieval key to the final result is appropriate.
The first two points should be self explanatory. A unique key yields a result in just one action. In the context of a wiki, page name -> content mapping performs a 1-action navigation. If I know the name of a page, I can evoke it through a single page search action, or by following a single hyperlink.
An "appropriate" key, on the other hand, means some sort of partial information that differs from a unique key in that, when applied in the first action, it does not take the user more than one additional action to retrieve the final result. In our wiki, a partial match of a page name, or a category/tag match both take me to a preselection of matching candidates from which I can choose by performing a second action, a final click. However, this concept works only for clearly defined namespaces, and/or properly assigned categories. That's why it is so important to have a clearly defined nomenclature in a defined scope. Right now, we already have lots of contents, but are only half way to a suitable solution for uniform information retrieval. }}
The two-action limit makes sense and is consistent with what theory I've read about usability. This is why it is better in some cases to have big, complicated pages with many related things in one place. (The table of contents feature is important in that case).
It seems to me that we have two sorts of categories: categories that apply to things within the game world (such as Domus Magnae, the Hermetic Houses, etc.) and categories that matter to gamers (published books, authors, editions, "fluff" vs. "crunch").
So I'd welcome a bit more thought and discussion about categories and nomenclature, and it would be good to capture that discussion on a page somewhere.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== A Category Suggestion
Many of the often-referred to pages are authors. I suggest a new category would be useful - "Author". This can be extended to "Line Contributor", to include people like the Line Editor.
{{cite|Yair R.}}
Good idea; let's do it. Let's go with "Line Contributor."
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
Version 54
Date: 2010-03-10 14:43:02 GMT Author: pm Comment: Recommendation for Author category
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Threshold/Transition (between Scope and Namespace & Nomenclature)
{{quote|I'm persistent. I'd like to revisit the dictionary thought. A wiki page is supposed to be expressed by its name, that is, the name it is referred to by other pages. There are numerous exceptions regarding feature-rich topics, but my general preference is to keep the average page relatively short, include links to other pages, and leave the more extensive sub topics to the linked pages to explain - divide et impera, by recursion. If, for example, I write an article about Troupe-Style Play, and want to explain the differences to a traditional, competitive GM vs. players scenario, I'd probably mention the role of the story guide and players, but any extensive coverage of the story guide would be a waste of time. Rather, the story guide deserves his own page, which can be easily maintained and extended, and, more importantly, linked by other pages.}}
Agreed, this is the way most of our pages ought to be designed. The [[Writers Guidelines]] page (or something like it) should be updated to express this idea.
There will be a few exceptions, for lengthy articles or pages where it makes sense to collect together a large amount of information. For example, most of our topic pages such as [[Welcome to Ars Magica]] and [[Order of Hermes]] will be big. But, 90% of our articles should be short -- a few paragraphs with some links and references.
{{cite| Andrew G.}}
== Namespace & Nomenclature
{{quote|In the context of a dictionary, any ambiguity caused by an undefined scope is likely to lead to a confusingly arranged archipelago of information whose assignment of contents is not only random at best, but whose nodes are also insufficiently accessible by the visitor who wants to find and read them. I'd like to note that we found a pretty good solution for the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, where * is one of the twelve Hermetic houses, and eventually created a reasonable bijective mapping of all information involved, yielding 3 times 12 distinctive pages.
What I'm trying to say is that, under the premise of a wiki, it is imperative to have a clearly structured nomenclature, one that more or less stands for itself, and one that can be used to comfortably retrieve the information contained in it. A wiki is not only about "use it, share it, contribute" - we could have that with a forum as well. It is also about structure.}}
I think the page categories help to make the information discoverable. Nomenclature in general is something that we should address on the "How to Use this Site" page, which doesn't yet exist.
In addition to the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, I think nomenclature issues occur in the titles of Ars Magica supplements: for instance, there are two supplements titled ''Covenants'' (one for 5th Edition and one for 2nd). We should straighten it out with a consistent solution. Pitt, I think you have more experience with this than I do. Can you make any specific suggestions?
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Navigation
{{quote|When I'm consulted to design navigational mechanisms of web sites, I usually try to go for a 2-action limit, meaning that it must not take a visitor more than two actions to find what he's looking for, provided that
* he knows what he's looking for,
* what he's looking for exists somewhere on the site,
* the retrieval key to the final result is appropriate.
The first two points should be self explanatory. A unique key yields a result in just one action. In the context of a wiki, page name -> content mapping performs a 1-action navigation. If I know the name of a page, I can evoke it through a single page search action, or by following a single hyperlink.
An "appropriate" key, on the other hand, means some sort of partial information that differs from a unique key in that, when applied in the first action, it does not take the user more than one additional action to retrieve the final result. In our wiki, a partial match of a page name, or a category/tag match both take me to a preselection of matching candidates from which I can choose by performing a second action, a final click. However, this concept works only for clearly defined namespaces, and/or properly assigned categories. That's why it is so important to have a clearly defined nomenclature in a defined scope. Right now, we already have lots of contents, but are only half way to a suitable solution for uniform information retrieval. }}
The two-action limit makes sense and is consistent with what theory I've read about usability. This is why it is better in some cases to have big, complicated pages with many related things in one place. (The table of contents feature is important in that case).
It seems to me that we have two sorts of categories: categories that apply to things within the game world (such as Domus Magnae, the Hermetic Houses, etc.) and categories that matter to gamers (published books, authors, editions, "fluff" vs. "crunch").
So I'd welcome a bit more thought and discussion about categories and nomenclature, and it would be good to capture that discussion on a page somewhere.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== A Category Suggestion
Many of the often-referred to pages are authors. I suggest a new category would be useful - "Author". This can be extended to "Line Contributor", to include people like the Line Editor.
{{cite|Yair R.}}
Good idea; let's do it. Let's go with "Line Contributor."
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
I had the same idea a couple of days ago when Andrew added a great many texts about the various authors. Being able to rely on such a category would simplify the search for persons significantly. As for the term, the two options are mostly about convenience (�Author�) vs. correctness (�Line Contributor�), and is also about what the category is actually supposed to comprehend. As I see it, a Line Contributor specifically works towards a product published by [[Atlas Games]], the owner of the line, while an Author would be any one person that adds to the game as such, including renowned authors for zines like [[Hermes Portal]] or [[Sub
Rosa Magazine]]. BTW, I think that either term would include the [[Line Editor]], because editing relies on authoring in the broadest sense.
{{cite|� Pitt}}
Version 55
Date: 2010-03-11 01:35:42 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Response about new category for authors
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Threshold/Transition (between Scope and Namespace & Nomenclature)
{{quote|I'm persistent. I'd like to revisit the dictionary thought. A wiki page is supposed to be expressed by its name, that is, the name it is referred to by other pages. There are numerous exceptions regarding feature-rich topics, but my general preference is to keep the average page relatively short, include links to other pages, and leave the more extensive sub topics to the linked pages to explain - divide et impera, by recursion. If, for example, I write an article about Troupe-Style Play, and want to explain the differences to a traditional, competitive GM vs. players scenario, I'd probably mention the role of the story guide and players, but any extensive coverage of the story guide would be a waste of time. Rather, the story guide deserves his own page, which can be easily maintained and extended, and, more importantly, linked by other pages.}}
Agreed, this is the way most of our pages ought to be designed. The [[Writers Guidelines]] page (or something like it) should be updated to express this idea.
There will be a few exceptions, for lengthy articles or pages where it makes sense to collect together a large amount of information. For example, most of our topic pages such as [[Welcome to Ars Magica]] and [[Order of Hermes]] will be big. But, 90% of our articles should be short -- a few paragraphs with some links and references.
{{cite| Andrew G.}}
== Namespace & Nomenclature
{{quote|In the context of a dictionary, any ambiguity caused by an undefined scope is likely to lead to a confusingly arranged archipelago of information whose assignment of contents is not only random at best, but whose nodes are also insufficiently accessible by the visitor who wants to find and read them. I'd like to note that we found a pretty good solution for the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, where * is one of the twelve Hermetic houses, and eventually created a reasonable bijective mapping of all information involved, yielding 3 times 12 distinctive pages.
What I'm trying to say is that, under the premise of a wiki, it is imperative to have a clearly structured nomenclature, one that more or less stands for itself, and one that can be used to comfortably retrieve the information contained in it. A wiki is not only about "use it, share it, contribute" - we could have that with a forum as well. It is also about structure.}}
I think the page categories help to make the information discoverable. Nomenclature in general is something that we should address on the "How to Use this Site" page, which doesn't yet exist.
In addition to the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, I think nomenclature issues occur in the titles of Ars Magica supplements: for instance, there are two supplements titled ''Covenants'' (one for 5th Edition and one for 2nd). We should straighten it out with a consistent solution. Pitt, I think you have more experience with this than I do. Can you make any specific suggestions?
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Navigation
{{quote|When I'm consulted to design navigational mechanisms of web sites, I usually try to go for a 2-action limit, meaning that it must not take a visitor more than two actions to find what he's looking for, provided that
* he knows what he's looking for,
* what he's looking for exists somewhere on the site,
* the retrieval key to the final result is appropriate.
The first two points should be self explanatory. A unique key yields a result in just one action. In the context of a wiki, page name -> content mapping performs a 1-action navigation. If I know the name of a page, I can evoke it through a single page search action, or by following a single hyperlink.
An "appropriate" key, on the other hand, means some sort of partial information that differs from a unique key in that, when applied in the first action, it does not take the user more than one additional action to retrieve the final result. In our wiki, a partial match of a page name, or a category/tag match both take me to a preselection of matching candidates from which I can choose by performing a second action, a final click. However, this concept works only for clearly defined namespaces, and/or properly assigned categories. That's why it is so important to have a clearly defined nomenclature in a defined scope. Right now, we already have lots of contents, but are only half way to a suitable solution for uniform information retrieval. }}
The two-action limit makes sense and is consistent with what theory I've read about usability. This is why it is better in some cases to have big, complicated pages with many related things in one place. (The table of contents feature is important in that case).
It seems to me that we have two sorts of categories: categories that apply to things within the game world (such as Domus Magnae, the Hermetic Houses, etc.) and categories that matter to gamers (published books, authors, editions, "fluff" vs. "crunch").
So I'd welcome a bit more thought and discussion about categories and nomenclature, and it would be good to capture that discussion on a page somewhere.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== A Category Suggestion
Many of the often-referred to pages are authors. I suggest a new category would be useful - "Author". This can be extended to "Line Contributor", to include people like the Line Editor.
{{cite|Yair R.}}
Good idea; let's do it. (rest of comment redacted)
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
I had the same idea a couple of days ago when Andrew added a great many texts about the various authors. Being able to rely on such a category would simplify the search for persons significantly. As for the term, the two options are mostly about convenience (�Author�) vs. correctness (�Line Contributor�), and is also about what the category is actually supposed to comprehend. As I see it, a Line Contributor specifically works towards a product published by [[Atlas Games]], the owner of the line, while an Author would be any one person that adds to the game as such, including renowned authors for zines like [[Hermes Portal]] or [[Sub
Rosa Magazine]]. BTW, I think that either term would include the [[Line Editor]], because editing relies on authoring in the broadest sense.
{{cite|� Pitt}}
I find Pitt's argument for simplicity persuasive. "Author" is easily understood whereas "Line Contributor" might make someone scratch his head. I took the liberty of creating a category named "Author" and putting a bunch of authors in it. No doubt I missed some. We can re-name the category later if we don't like the name "Author"
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
Version 56
Date: 2010-03-26 02:17:43 GMT Author: AndrewGronosky Comment: Added status & plans; removed author category discussion
This page is for administrative discussions among the site contributors.
{{toc}}
= Project Status & Plans
Updated 2010-03-25
We are preparing for a permanent merger with the [[http://www.redcap.org/ | Project: Redcap]] site. The new site will be called Project: Redcap, but it will have all the contents of this site (HermesWeb).
Pitt is planning to implement and test a software upgrade before we merge the sites. [[Andrew Gronosky]] will be shifting his efforts from content creation toward organization.
Andrew is also working on getting the [[writers guidelines]] page and other project-related pages into more useful shape.
= Getting Involved
In order to get a site added here, you don't have to edit the pages yourself. You can [[contact]] Andrew, and ask him to post material for you.
If you do have an interest in editing pages yourself, you are welcome to do so. You might want to experiment in the [[sandbox]] to get a feel for how editing works.
[[Contributing]] does not require you to open an account or join the mailing list. We have a guest accounts that occasional contributors can use. If you want to contribute regularly, using your own account just makes your contributions more visible.
= E-Mail List
We have an e-mail list that is actively used by team members to plan and discuss the development of this site. To join, send e-mail to %%mlm at lists dot ekkaia dot org%% with the words __subscribe hermesweb__ in the subject line.
= Design Questions
There are a number of design questions, articulated by Pitt on the mailing list, that we ought to keep in mind. It will take time and consensus-building to fully settle all of these. For now, the discussion is taking place on the Wiki.
== Scope
Basically, what is the site about? What kinds of content do we want to include or exclude?
{{quote| Even if we should come up with an answer like "infinite", we should still ask ourselves what the actual extend of the project is, as "infinite" would be still far better than "undefined", the current status. Is HermesWeb simply about collecting as much material about Ars Magica as possible? If so, are the sources supposed to be exclusively canon-only or rather unbounded, the latter including any sort of fan material? Is it about collecting links to external resources, or about hosting actual information on-site? We're likely to be revisiting the copyright dilemma here. We discussed most of this before, vaguely, but haven't found a solution yet, let alone nailed it down. All we know right now is what HermesWeb is not: it's not a collection of spells, effects, or items. SpellsWiki is far better suited for that purpose. It's (probably) also not exclusively about fan material, because that niche is covered by countless other sites, such as Durenmar et al.
When we decided to go for a wiki, we implicitly bought a concept that works similar to a dictionary: one page per term, with pages containing links to synonyms, antonyms, and other relatives. I'm not saying that a wiki can't be used to maintain a regular web site (in fact, I do that regularly), but I think that having ambiguous terms of any kind means to throttle its potential, especially in a multi-user environment with lots of different writing styles. If we went for the answer "infinite" to the question above, that is, for an unbound environment, we might be better off with a traditional hierarchical system, as it is represented by a file system, for example, because sooner or later we're going to find ourselves confronted with one of the following problems. }}
I think we all have ideas of what the scope should be -- it's just that, at present, we all probably have different ideas. ;-) My own opinion is that the scope should encompass two things:
# Providing ''findable'' links to as much Ars Magica material as possible. That is the original mission of Project: Redcap and the community needs a site that does that job.
# Being an encyclopedia of the canon, current and old. This is the dictionary idea Pitt discussed above.
Fan-created content is welcome, but it is not our primary mission to host it. For my part I am more interested in linking to fan content than in hosting it. That said, if someone wants to put fan content here in order to make it easier to find (and to give it a wider audience), I see no reason to discourage him/her.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Threshold/Transition (between Scope and Namespace & Nomenclature)
{{quote|I'm persistent. I'd like to revisit the dictionary thought. A wiki page is supposed to be expressed by its name, that is, the name it is referred to by other pages. There are numerous exceptions regarding feature-rich topics, but my general preference is to keep the average page relatively short, include links to other pages, and leave the more extensive sub topics to the linked pages to explain - divide et impera, by recursion. If, for example, I write an article about Troupe-Style Play, and want to explain the differences to a traditional, competitive GM vs. players scenario, I'd probably mention the role of the story guide and players, but any extensive coverage of the story guide would be a waste of time. Rather, the story guide deserves his own page, which can be easily maintained and extended, and, more importantly, linked by other pages.}}
Agreed, this is the way most of our pages ought to be designed. The [[Writers Guidelines]] page (or something like it) should be updated to express this idea.
There will be a few exceptions, for lengthy articles or pages where it makes sense to collect together a large amount of information. For example, most of our topic pages such as [[Welcome to Ars Magica]] and [[Order of Hermes]] will be big. But, 90% of our articles should be short -- a few paragraphs with some links and references.
{{cite| Andrew G.}}
== Namespace & Nomenclature
{{quote|In the context of a dictionary, any ambiguity caused by an undefined scope is likely to lead to a confusingly arranged archipelago of information whose assignment of contents is not only random at best, but whose nodes are also insufficiently accessible by the visitor who wants to find and read them. I'd like to note that we found a pretty good solution for the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, where * is one of the twelve Hermetic houses, and eventually created a reasonable bijective mapping of all information involved, yielding 3 times 12 distinctive pages.
What I'm trying to say is that, under the premise of a wiki, it is imperative to have a clearly structured nomenclature, one that more or less stands for itself, and one that can be used to comfortably retrieve the information contained in it. A wiki is not only about "use it, share it, contribute" - we could have that with a forum as well. It is also about structure.}}
I think the page categories help to make the information discoverable. Nomenclature in general is something that we should address on the "How to Use this Site" page, which doesn't yet exist.
In addition to the \{founder,house,member\}-* dilemma, I think nomenclature issues occur in the titles of Ars Magica supplements: for instance, there are two supplements titled ''Covenants'' (one for 5th Edition and one for 2nd). We should straighten it out with a consistent solution. Pitt, I think you have more experience with this than I do. Can you make any specific suggestions?
{{cite|Andrew G.}}
== Navigation
{{quote|When I'm consulted to design navigational mechanisms of web sites, I usually try to go for a 2-action limit, meaning that it must not take a visitor more than two actions to find what he's looking for, provided that
* he knows what he's looking for,
* what he's looking for exists somewhere on the site,
* the retrieval key to the final result is appropriate.
The first two points should be self explanatory. A unique key yields a result in just one action. In the context of a wiki, page name -> content mapping performs a 1-action navigation. If I know the name of a page, I can evoke it through a single page search action, or by following a single hyperlink.
An "appropriate" key, on the other hand, means some sort of partial information that differs from a unique key in that, when applied in the first action, it does not take the user more than one additional action to retrieve the final result. In our wiki, a partial match of a page name, or a category/tag match both take me to a preselection of matching candidates from which I can choose by performing a second action, a final click. However, this concept works only for clearly defined namespaces, and/or properly assigned categories. That's why it is so important to have a clearly defined nomenclature in a defined scope. Right now, we already have lots of contents, but are only half way to a suitable solution for uniform information retrieval. }}
The two-action limit makes sense and is consistent with what theory I've read about usability. This is why it is better in some cases to have big, complicated pages with many related things in one place. (The table of contents feature is important in that case).
It seems to me that we have two sorts of categories: categories that apply to things within the game world (such as Domus Magnae, the Hermetic Houses, etc.) and categories that matter to gamers (published books, authors, editions, "fluff" vs. "crunch").
So I'd welcome a bit more thought and discussion about categories and nomenclature, and it would be good to capture that discussion on a page somewhere.
{{cite|Andrew G.}}