Will Communities survive any impending changes to / dissolution of Google+?
I think all but the real diehard Plussers would have to be pessimistic by now about the chances of Google+ surviving for many more years in its present form. For example, my guess would be on Drive gradually assimilating more of Plus's photo editing features — as we've seen recently, alignment of the two services in that regard has already started.
How about Communities, though? Do people think they'll survive any impending changes / dissolution of Google+? Going from the more thoughtful and well-moderated Communities such as the excellent Content Strategy one, you might well feel the chances are good. But there are an awful lot more that are essentially defunct (including my shamefully neglected Content Engineering for Humans one — where's the blushing emoticon when you need it?) And of course there are commercial considerations that go beyond mere user numbers and enthusiasm. The fate of Reader shows that.
Over the last couple of weekends, I’ve been refining a framework for visualizing schemas that: - Provides an accessible way for authors, managers, and schema developers alike to understand or refine a content model. - Is easy to update and maintain without specialist tools or knowledge. - Offers a single-page view of the whole content model at a glance, rather than the common approach of revealing only certain aspects of the model in each view. (While it can sometimes be helpful to focus on details of the model, the full picture is very helpful for putting the detail in context and working with the model in a way that’s easily grasped.) - Is structured enough that it could be parsed to generate at least a skeleton formal schema such as a DTD.
I hope this sparks some ideas among community members — let me know what you think!
Thanks, Liam. They're intended for two situations:
1. In collaborative requirements gathering among content teams and information architects. I've already successfully used this format with a client to clarify DITA specialization needs, and now that's finished I'll use the same chart as a reference when actually going ahead and doing the specialized DTDs. The format could also be used to automatically generate at least a starting point for a formal schema such as a DTD. The most straightforward way might be to export the sheet as CSV and parse that based on the column in which an element name appeared and the number format (if any) in that element's row. 2. When people are authoring in XML and need a quick, at-a-glance reference (someone commented that they'd like get laminated posters of these done for the three main "out-of-box" DITA topic types, so their authors could hang them in their cubicles)
Though I've used DITA examples, there's absolutely no reason that the visualization couldn't be used to represent other documentation schemas such as DocBook, or custom-designed ones, though pragmatic decisions might need to be made as to the level of nesting represented in any one such diagram. In the same way that I had "[regular block elements]" in the example, an indication might need to be given as to the nested structures that were represented separately, on a different sheet.
I've developed a framework for visualizing and modifying complex nested content models using spreadsheet tools. I thought it might be interesting to people here — potentially useful for anyone who's already using such complex structures, for example users of DITA XML, but perhaps also interesting for those used to simpler structures (metadata + title/s + description/s + body) who are curious and brave enough to peer into the deeps of nested elements and recursive patterns that us XML denizens inhabit. I'm particularly thinking back to +Kevin Potts's post a couple of years ago where we had a fruitful discussion about different flavors of structured content: plus.google.com/+KevinPotts/posts/ASqwWdWjB9m
Hi Gil, thanks for the comment. Yes, that was exactly my goal with this visualization — a friendly view on the whole context, both for reference and for use when tweaking or creating new document models. I reposted the piece on LinkedIn with the title "Democratizing Complex Content Models" because of that sense of giving writers access to the full model, not just a tiny window on it.
I suppose I should set up ecommerce on my blog and sell laminated posters at $40 a pop... ;-) Seriously, feel free to tweak the templates and print them out.
A lovely photo of Chicago. I'm told that's a lake, rather than the sea as I first thought. Looking forward to seeing it and eating some pizza. But mostly to attending the world's biggest DITA event again, seeing some great talks and doing a bit of talking myself, about some sensible ways to ensure sustainable content management projects or turn around failing ones… Detoxing failing content management projects: education, ownership, and discipline http://www.cm-strategies.com/2015/abstracts.htm#Pairman
Well. I've been programming for 30 years, and I still like my tabs, but I actually wasn't convinced of their superiority until after I was exposed to the ideas of both sides some 20 years ago. I've yet to be convinced otherwise.
Because I care so much about the white space used in my code, I always follow the white space practice already in place when I'm modifying code (which is, really, most of what I do). For some reason, it seems like people that prefer spaces (or don't think about it) can't or won't do that, so spaces end up being the "common denominator". Though, that probably a biased view of things, so I wouldn't use it as a data point.
Copy/paste can be a problem, but copy/pasting code probably means you are doing something wrong to begin with. Even then concerns over the white space and the reader should provide you enough time to fix the white space if you can't figure out how to copy/paste it correctly.
Hi all, I assume most people here are already users of Ghost, but if there's anyone like me who's been waiting to migrate their blog to Ghost, you might want to vote for this card on the Ghost Roadmap? Custom permalinks:https://trello.com/c/kwiC3ljz
This means that you'll easily be able to keep your existing post links valid, without getting into redirection config files. Although this item's tagged as "Development", it seems to be stalled.
Organize anything, together. Trello is a collaboration tool that organizes your projects into boards. In one glance, know what's being worked on, who's working on what, and where something is in a process.
Service friendly but as others have noted, some members of a group can wait a while for their dish to arrive. Truffled mac and cheese was good. Beef hash OK though some of the potato chunks were a little undercooked. French toast seemed to have cheese added — not bad but not quite what was expected. Prices on the high side — service and cooking consistency should be a bit better for those prices.
Lots of tasty stuff here. I really like the edible fern (過貓) topped with kumquat pieces and a kumquat sauce. There are some great rice noodles in taro sauce, good fried rice, and even some decent ginger/vinegar intestines – not my usual kind of food but I like the version they do here.
Tasty food. The spinach / Emmental / egg crepe was nice. Quite a nice location in a lovely old building. A bit pricey, and most of the seating was in a busier area than some of the photos would suggest, so just four stars instead of five.
I've been here (and had food to go from here) more times than I can remember. Never been disappointed. Best Italian food for the price in Taipei. There are more authentic places, of course, but at three times the price.