On Wednesday, February 26, 2003, at 03:56 AM, Serge Stinckwich wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 23:51:33 +0100
> Hannes Hirzel <hannes.hirzel.squeaklist at bluewin.ch> wrote:
>
>>
>> As Stephen points out the swiki has something similar like the well
>> known wiki "categories" pages. Actually each page acts as a category
>> page because it has a drop-down menu which shows the pages which link 
>> to
>> the page.
>
> As i say on the Wiki (http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2352), the 
> only problem i have with Swiki is
> that there is no CapitalizedWords. I like them because they force you 
> to create meaningfull links, not like single word (like comment or 
> refactor).
> Read this for a list of advantages of collapsed words : 
> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiNameAdvantages

Well, Swiki still allows CapitalizedWords for wiki page names, it just 
doesn't enforce them. :-)

I don't really buy the idea that enforcing CapitalizedWords is better.  
The Squeak Swiki has evolved a convention of not using 
CapitalizedWords, so I think we should probably stick with that.

I think allowing single word page names is actually a good thing.  It 
allows the creation of "definition" pages for words like VM, image, 
MVC, Morph, Preference, etc., which can be used to create a more 
Encyclopedic Swiki.

http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2348

Also see http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiNameDisadvantages ;-)

(Actually, I agree that "comment" is a bad example of a wiki page 
name... we should probably not have wiki pages devoted to method 
names... that's too low a level of detail, and prone to being made 
obsolete.)

> I start to add several WikiTag 
> (http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3050). For example, put RecycleMe 
> on unused Swiki pages. when you start to create new
> swiki pages, use one in the recycle bin.

Actually, I don't mind your "RecycleMe" and "RefactorMe" 
CapitalizedWords for these pages.  Using CapitalizedWords for these, 
indicates that these are special WikiTags, not regular pages, because 
the rest of the swiki does not use them.  So that's good.

>> The problem at the moment is that categorization is not put to
>> systematic use.
>>
>> If someone has a good idea of a categorization scheme please step
>> forward.
>>
>> A least we have the color codes in the title section. And we have some
>> good entry points into the net of interlinked pages.
>
> Yes, i know about the color codes, but you can't search colors 
> categories and the number of categories are fixed right now.

I have to admit that I never notice the color codes and don't find them 
particularly useful.  I've probably created a bunch of pages with the 
wrong color code. :-)

- Doug Way