extract_idea1Add my vote for this tag create new tag
, view all tags
The name of the Main web has been a controversial issue, see SimplerTWikiDistribution, RenameTheMainWeb.

The Main web has these purposes:

At work we use it also to document other company specific things like e-mail aliases. Personally I don't think it is difficult for users to understand Main.JoeLast, Main.TechWriterGroup or Main.SanJoseOffice.

Splitting the Main web up into Main, Users, Groups, Offices webs would be possible, but we would get more clutter and less obvious linking. I.e. you would need to say Set GROUP = Users.JoeAverage, User.JoeLast to define a group instead of simply Set GROUP = JoeAverage, JoeLast.

Another idea is to rename the Main web to Home. That would indicate that you can go back to home, and you would refer to Home.JoeLast, Home.TechWriterGroup or Home.SanJoseOffice.

-- PeterThoeny - 28 Jan 2002

There's a long-standing issue with user names: it's confusing to see JoachimDurchholz during View but having to type Main.JoachimDurchholz during edit. (Occasionally I even see links that don't work because the author didn't correct the missing Main.)

I see two ways of addressing this:

  1. Display the "Main" prefix. If Main is renamed to User, this would result in User.JoachimDurchholz, which would actually convey meaning to a reader.
  2. Allow topics to be "global", i.e. they don't need their web prefix to be made into links
The second alternative has far-reaching ramifications as far as I can see, while the first would simplify the rendering, so I'm favoring the first one.

As an aside note, I'd like to have TWiki configurable wrt. what the User web is. For example, I could rename the User web to Anwender on a German site.

-- JoachimDurchholz - 29 Jan 2002

I'd suggest to split the user and group profiles into their separate web. The Main web should be for the site home page (and first-time user information such as site rationale, site policies, links to related sites (i.e. a "webliography"), links to the user documentation, as appropriate).

IOW it should become the entry point for new users.

-- JoachimDurchholz - 29 Jan 2002

I agree with renaming Main to Home. As for the moving user pages to a User web, could groups and locations not also be in the User web as well (rather than their own Group web).


  • User.AdrianLynch
  • User.AdminGroup
  • User.PerthOffice

Or do you think that would confuse things more?

-- AdrianLynch - 29 Jan 2002

Groups should probably go into User.

Not sure about offices though. (Except, maybe, if seen as "organisational group". I.e. a large company might say "Division" instead of "Office". Hmm... maybe this is something for a TWiki Administrator's Guide.)

-- JoachimDurchholz - 30 Jan 2002

I have created a patch which put all things releated to user information in the User web which leaves the Main web to servse only as for the site home page. See UserWeb.

-- KevinAtkinson - 29 Jan 2002

I like PeterThoeny 's proposal to rename Main web to Home, so it will be "site homepage". But I think KevinAtkinson 's idea to put all user-related info into User web is also great. Can we have both?

Or, better question is: what will be obvious for first-time visitor of TWiki-powered site? On site's homepage (Home.WebHome), after clicking on [ Index ] link, s/he expects a list of dozen or so pages related to common information about whole site, and nothing else. S/he does not know yet how TWiki stores own system info. Do we want to drown poor newbie in dozens or hundreds of pages with usernames?

It is not about if Main.UserName is as easy to type as User.UserName. Home web is very precious space and should not be cluttered by system information, if possible, IMHO. Internet is big dumpster and is hard to find relevant info anyway, let's keep TWiki-powered part of internet clean.

I want to teach my users to create new topic in the web related to the topic (meeting notes in Meetings, bug report in Bugs, etc.). So it will be seamless to them to place users to User (or Users ) web, and link to Main or Home web to site-wide info like mission statement or so.

Core team developers get used to have users in Main web, quick and dirty simple solution. But if clean Home web is easy enough to implement, and is more obvious for users, is "tradition" worth to keep? I even contemplate to create WebMaintenance topic in each web to put web maintenence links there, so newbie users will not be intimidated with too many links to ignore.

After we remove users from Main web, it's irrelevant how it will be named. It may stay Main, and we can recommend admin to name main web as TWIKITOOLNAME name is, so we can simplify Tooltopic header - eliminate TWIKITOOLNAME . More is discussed in SimplerDefaultTemplates.

Having users in Main or Home will not prevent me to use TWiki - it is great tool, thank you all. Sorry if I sound negative, beacuse I am not. I love TWiki and want it to succeed.

-- PeterMasiar - 31 Jan 2002

FYI: When I say all user related pages I mean just about anything in Main except the Web* pages. On my site I renamed Main to Intro. You can find my TWiki site which has my UserWeb patch as well as one to require email verification and a few other minor tweaks. You can find it at http://www.ibiblio.org/kevinamm-bin/view.

-- KevinAtkinson

Is there any chance that KevinAtkinson's changes will make it to BeijingRelease? Or ever to any release? Or do we have other plans to put user-related info in separate web, cleaning Main web to important info only?

Or, at least can we start moving in this direction, like have %USERWEB% variable (with value "Main" for now) and write %USERWEB.UserName in templates etc.

IMHO it is conterintuitive to write "Main." before username. And is wrong to pollute Main web with dozens or hundreds of topic with usernames. Only most important topic, relevant to whole site, should be listed in Main.Index.

Most of the files in Main = User web are user-related or standard web topics, but there is only one file FileAttachment which I am not sure why is in Main.

In some future distributions default instalation will cleared from old inherited issues. And used may have Main web (or Home web) - not system-related, but custom info shared between webs.

-- PeterMasiar - 11 Feb 2002

I think it would only add confusion to create special webs for users and/or groups and/or offices. I say, let them all be in the Main web, but please do rename the Main web into Home which is much more intuitive.

While I'm at it, I would strongly suggest a few more changes in the same direction:

  • rename "Test" web to "Sandbox" This has been suggested by others already and I strongly support the idea.
  • rename all "WebHome" pages to "HomePage" Like the issue about Main.*, HomePage is intuitive because it's the name commonly used throughout the Internet for the starting page of any web.
  • rename "TWiki" in all file&folder names to "Twiki" This is perhaps a strange request, but it boils down to a confusing mass of uppercase and lowercase names being used throughout twiki.org and the code, twiki , Twiki , TWiki , not to mention wiki and Wiki . Having all kinds of mixtures really is confusing. Since we can't use lowercase in some instances, I would prefer to have it Title Case throughout the site, documentation and in the code itself. So, can I ask for "Twiki" and "Wiki" as the only occurrences? (I know Peter has © on "TWiki" but it's a strange exception in the naming scheme.)
  • What do you think of the idea of renaming the TWiki web to Help ? That would help to give it a more descriptive name; after all, what it contains is information about how to work with Twiki and such typical "Help and Support" issues.

I also support the idea of a simpler distribution.

-- TorbenGB - 24 Feb 2002

I second most of the ideas, with a little bit of hesitation with respect to:

  • "Home" as the name of the web containing the users -- I think "Users" is more intuitive, even if it includes groups and offices -- they are still "users". My only reservation is the Unix/Linux tendency to say "Lusers" which is inappropriate in the world that I want to see.
  • "Help" -- my first thought is trying to incorporate a word that means "Documentation" (documentation is too long -- maybe "Docs").

-- RandyKramer - 24 Feb 2002

Two short comments on "Users" and "Docs":

  • To call the main web "Users" does not help, IMHO. Primarily because it doesn't support the notion of a starting point like "Home" does, and it's more an artifact of the TWiki system rather than a logical web aspect. Besides, it's error-prone when used in links because of plural/singular confusion: if we accept that groups are categorized as users, it may be meaningful to write Users.DevelopmentDepartment but then we would refer to the individuals in the singular User.TorbenGB . Home doesn't have this weakness and is intuitive.
  • We wanted to rename Test to Sandbox because it was conflicting with business usage of 'Testing'. The same applies to Documentation I would argue. In fact, aren't many TWiki webs made for exactly that purpose: documentation? In nearly all computer systems, Help refers to a built-in help reference that intends to aid the user in using the system at hand.

-- TorbenGB - 24 Feb 2002


  • To call the main web "Users" does not help, IMHO. Primarily because it doesn't support the notion of a starting point like "Home" does, and it's more an artifact of the TWiki system rather than a logical web aspect.

IMHO, there should be a Home web (a starting point) and a User web (a list or registration of users). I don't think User.DevelopmentDepartment or User.AdminGroup or User.LondonOffice would be confusing or blatantly "wrong" as opposed to Users.LondonOffice -- the plurality is covered in the collective name (Department, Group, Office).

Re: Docs: "Help" is fine with me smile

-- RandyKramer - 25 Feb 2002

IMHO TWiki should avoid to hog Help web for the same reasons we almost decided smile to rename Test web to Sandbox. Because if you have a dozen of webs, you may want to have place for all common help information (relevant to all webs). And Help will be perfect intuitive name for such a web. TWiki is IMHO perfect name for information about TWiki, all TWiki documentation, as it is now. You want not just any help, any documentation - you want help about TWiki.

I did search and I did found TWiki spelled as Twiki on couple pages. IMO it is just a simple typo, I can volunteer to fix it, if somebody from Core team think is is good idea.

I prefer not rename WebHome to HomePage either. Usually it is used as text Home inside link anyway, and I like that all system pages (Required by TWiki for web maintenance) start with Web... They are listed together in index - and towards the end of the list, which is nice touch.

About HomePage being more intuitive: In order to understand TWiki-based intranet site, users need to think in terms of pages (can we get rid of "topic" and call it just a page?) and folders of pages = webs. All webs are almost equal, Main web is more equal than others. And it is IMHO intuitive enough that WebHome is home page for each web.

I agree with TorbenGB that simple renaming Main web to User web will not help. IMO JoachimDurchholz proposed much better solution: split two current usages of Main web into two separate webs: leave Main only for most important info for all webs, and put all user-related info into User web. Criteria should be: if I do Index or Recent changes in Main web, what info I want to see? Surely not most recent 200 users registered, right? smile

Any chances of splitting Main web for real pages, and putting user-related pages into User? To make default distribution simpler and more intuitive? (see SimplerTWikiDistribution) I am little hesitating (I do not know how to do that smile ) to apply myself UserWeb patch.

-- PeterMasiar - 25 Feb 2002

Regarding my earlier points about WebHome->HomePage, TWiki->Twiki and TWiki->Help, I stand corrected. You proposed good arguments for keeping the TWiki web as it is, and in light of your arguments I now agree with you on it.

Splitting the Main web into Home and User seems like a very good idea. I stil worry that novice users will be confused about using singular User about groups, or plural Users about persons (whichever one you opt for). The singular User would be the most obvious to go for, I think.

As an intranet, users would typically be busy people who want it simple, so this confusion might be a weakness. But let it be said that "wanting it simple" is what TWiki delivers best of all the solutions I've seen yet.

-- TorbenGB - 26 Feb 2002

The plural issue is solvable - it's already in place for topic names, it should be possible to reuse the mechanism for web names.

-- JoachimDurchholz - 27 Feb 2002

My solution was the opposite route:

  • Keep Main as it is (My users are used to write Main.MyName, changing this would be too painful), make it clear it is a kind of "Local Settings" web on its WebHome.
  • Move the entry point outside Main (link pointed to by the upper left icon, redirects from .htaccess) but in a Web named to indicate the purpose of the web: It is "Koala" for the wiki of my Koala team. At http://koala.ilog.fr/wiki , the entrance is Koala, and you can find the Main web grouped under the "Wiki" "system" webs: Test, TWiki, Plugins... "RND" for the wiki for the R&D at work, "ILOG" for the main wiki at ILOG, etc...
If you look at it, the problem is just the WebHome in Main that is used as a front page. Better change just this rather than the whole web...

-- ColasNahaboo - 24 May 2002

Based on feedback from my own TWiki users, I advocate the renamings:

  • Split Main into Home and User. I like the split because of the arguments above regarding the distinct uses of the two sets of topics. Seems to me that most users don't know, or need to know anything about groups, so the plurality of the web name is a non-problem.
  • Rename TWiki web to Help. My users often ask where the help is, since the twiki link atop each page really doesn't "say" anything to them. Calling it help would be obvious and consistent with other applications. I also suspect that in some deployments the "twiki" brand is pretty much non-existent; this would allow meaningful renaming of the platform as a whole.

Are there any roadblocks to getting this done for the BeijingRelease? I have plentiful free time right now and would like to see this done soon (since I'm eager to deploy twiki on a new site I'm developing).

-- ToddJonker - 14 Aug 2002

I agree with Todd. We find users are currently confused by both "Main" and "TWiki" headings. They are unclear what "Main" is for. Breaking the Users part out is good as we have trouble getting users to understand where the user pages actually exist. For the "TWiki" web, again it is not clear to a user what this link is for -it's just another word they don't really need to know. "Help" seems like an obvious and very, er, helpful name for this web.

-- MartinWatt - 17 Aug 2002

Actually I'm not sure "Home" is any better than "Main". Both imply they are the most important page in the web, where you will return to frequently. However 99% of the time, users are not going to visit the Main/Home web at all.

-- MartinWatt - 17 Aug 2002

Many of the suggestions make good points, but none of them strike me as warranting any changes that will affect current installations. For example, teaching everybody to now type User.ThomasWeigert instead of Main.ThomasWeigert will be a major headache, as will having to go through all the *,v files to systematically replace Main by User. Some additional comments:

  • Much of this debate seems to be driven by confusion on what some of these webs are for. Once you accept that Main is just there to hold local user information, local groups, and other info, there seems little point of fretting about its name. The distribution version should not contain any preconfigured users or offices. If we want to honor members of the core team, these topics belong into the TWiki web. Also, FileAttachment seems out of place.
  • Similarly, the TWiki web is about the TWiki itself, primarily help and documentation, as well as any configuration of the tool. There is no reason for topics such as BillClinton (I notice that twiki.org does not have this topic any more).
  • The Know web seems to be just a relic of the past and should be deleted.
  • As recommended earlier by TorbenGB, TWiki should be systematically replaced by Twiki. For new users (and old alike) the unique spelling of TWiki is more of a nuisance than the thrill that they get out of knowing it has something to do with "Wiki" and with "TakeFive".
  • There needs to be a systematic separation between system files and data files, as discussed (and ignored) in PubsDirectoryShouldNotHoldSystemFiles. In addition, there needs to be a policy about where plugins and their documentation go. (I suggest a lib/Plugins/ directory for the source, and data/TWiki/ for the documentation.)

-- ThomasWeigert - 17 Aug 2002

After some thoughtful shower-time this morning smile I'd like to slightly revise my earlier comments. I suggest we change our perspective and focus on a good design heuristic: make simple things simple. For Twiki, the "simple thing" would be a deployment with a single coherent topic. This installation shouldn't need a whole raft of webs. What makes most sense to me, from this perspective, is that everything the users care about should be in the Main web. [Note that I greatly prefer the term "zone" as discussed elsewhere (RenameWebToZone ).]

Now that I think of it this way, I believe we should keep Main with that name, but present it purely as the place for the main content of the system. If the installation requires more complex structuring, more webs can be added, but Main still stays as the main entry point. When users see the word main, they will naturally assume that the site's main information lies there, so let's just do that!

I still like the idea of moving user/group management into a Users web. And moving all system-configuration stuff elsewhere. This leave the Main web an empty little shell, just waiting for users to add the content that really matters to them.

I believe we should have a dedicated Help web, so that it is easy for new users to find. Leave the administrative bits in the TWiki web, and then remove it from the default page banner. There's no reason it need to have a visible shortcut if it's only going to be used by the administrators.

We should keep in mind that the systems users generally don't need (or even want) to know what "TWiki" is (as a piece of software), any more than the users of other web-based application need to know the platform software system. Thus having "TWiki" up on the banner is pretty meaningless to them. It's clear that the web and page names are navigational aids and they need to be considered from the user's perspective. If TWiki is targeting corporate intranets, our target users have to be assumed to be quite thoroughly techno-naive. We can't just say "they will have to learn that the Main web holds users and little else". Users don't want to learn TWiki, they just want to use it.

Under this plan we have the following out-of-box webs:

  • Main -- for the main content of simple sites, and for entry-point navigation of more complex sites. Looks to me like this would have only the core administrative files that are in each web: WebChanges, WebHome, WebIndex, WebNotify, WebPreferences, WebSearch, and WebStatistics.
  • Users -- for management of users/groups/etc. This makes it easy for users to find each other, and also separates administration from the "real" content.
  • Know -- may be worth keeping as a case study in advanced twiki topic. But perhaps it shouldn't be linked from the banner.
  • Sandbox
  • TWiki -- for site-level administration and utilities. Also installation documentation, plugins, etc. I propose that this web not be linked from the default page banner. The users shouldn't need to know it exists.
  • Help -- for end-user documentation pages. Almost every modern desktop app has a HELP menu, Twiki should be the same. As per usual application design conventions, this should be the last web linked from the default page banner. By making this web ONLY end-user docs, the index page may actually be useful; the TWiki web's current 100+ entry index is too big to be of much help to neophyte users.

-- ToddJonker - 19 Aug 2002

I would like to emphasise a point: separate locally-modifiable Webs (Users, Plugins...) from "Distribution" Webs (Standard doc in TWiki), so that we can upgrade by blindly un-zipping a distrib in place. Notably Site Prefs should be moved outside TWiki (into Main - or better another name like Prefs, see below - seems logical).

Another sugegstion would be, if we put users outside Main, to not have anymore Web named "Main". This way we could add a "backcompat" option to make all links Main.XXX point to Users.XXX automatically to ease transition and not having to modify old pages.

-- ColasNahaboo - 20 Aug 2002

ToddJonker gives a good suggestion above. I only have two points in opposition:

  • Users web: The Main.Username approach had the advantage of being singular and plural in one word (I know there's a word for that but I can't remember it! smile ) whereas a Users web adds risk of confusion, as I've commented earlier (it doesn't make sense to write Users.TorbenGB because I'm not a plural, even though I am a twin). As a solution, either think of a better name for the web, or - much better! - implement the automatic-plural-finder that already works for topics.
  • TWiki web: I take it this was a typo, and should really have been Twiki, right? You wanted to make simple things simple, and I believe that's the strongest argument for the latter spelling.

Besides, collecting all the different web and site preferences in one place (a few pages only in one web) seems like a really good idea - enter the concept of the Control Panel!

-- TorbenGB - 21 Aug 2002

My 2c:

  • Main should be an empty web|zone with just the default pages (index, changes, etc.).
    • Tangent topic: WebIndex should be the short form list, and WebTopics the long form. Indices in books are just the word and the page# they are found in right?
  • Twiki zone should hold the system documentation, aka the help files. After all, they do describe how the software called Twiki works.
    • on new installations Help could be an alias which points to the Twiki zone. Deployments which use Help for other things simply delete the alias. The same mechanism can be used for Test and Sandbox
  • Site configuration should be in a seperate zone, I don't know what to call it, config perhaps? (I don't like Prefs for this because a preference is what I would like something to be, if a I have a choice, with the implication that it can be overridden by the system at it's discretion.)
  • Users and User should be synonymous. I also have no problems with Groups and Offices being considered just a special kind of user. Those organisations large enough to need seperates zones for these should be able to create them easily enough.
  • The Twiki distribution package should only contain the Twiki and Config zones, with an installation script to optionally create sample Main, Know, Sandbox, Users webs (using template topics held in the Twiki documentation web?).
    • Alternately, there could be two distribution packages, one for upgrading and the second with sample zones for new installations. Similar to how the stable/beta packages work now.
    • Using either of these approaches, an empty by default Main zone should leave existing installations which use it for user registration unaffected.
  • Plugins is a special case. I'm not sure what the wisest route here is. We need to leave room for the default distribution package to include some, while at the same time ensuring upgrades don't clobber customized sites.

-- MattWilkie - 21 Aug 2002

(Note: ToddJonker forgot to sign his 19 Aug post, so it appeared I wrote all his contribution. I corrected it.)

What I did for KoalaSkin for the upgrade problem is that the distribution does not provide any file that has to be customized locally. Thus you can just unzip the distrib in place to upgrade. Then I just add in the release notes what steps are to be done after upgrade if any.

For first time installs, I provided a script that when run would create default versions of the customizable pages. You could either provide a .zip inside the distrib to unzip for first-time installs.

For Plugins, I would advise the same principles: You can distribute plugins if their customization is done in a file not included in the distrib.

And I would emphasize strongly for whatever we do, not to change habits of users! We should not make them type Users.FooBar instead of Main.FooBar So if the decide to rename Main, we should not have a Main web anymore, to be able to provide transparent redirection (same with Test -> Sandbox)

PS: On the help topic, on my site I made a local "Wiki" web, containing all the help local to my install(s), pointing also to the "standard doc" in the TWiki web. This could be a solution

-- ColasNahaboo - 23 Aug 2002

I like the way the KoalaSkin install and upgrades work, something similar for Twiki would be good.

WRT not changing the habits of users: my proposal would have no effect on existing installations, even through upgrades.

-- MattWilkie - 23 Aug 2002

OT: there is something strange happening with the diffs on this topic for the last few days (since r1.23). The note about ToddJonker's unsigned contribution has been shown to be "corrected" by ColasNahaboo, MattWilkie, and now TorbenGB. I don't know if Torben changed anything in this paragraph, but I didn't. No, I didn't. -- TorbenGB

Also the diff for r1.25 > r.124 shows me as having changed three paragraphs in Colas's 23-Aug post which I'm pretty sure I didn't touch. The only correctly attributed change is the two short paragraphs I added to the bottom ("I like the bottom ... even through upgrades")

I wonder if the diff for this addition is going to show any extra changes attributed to me...

-- MattWilkie - 26 Aug 2002

On the subject of what the user name should be prefixed with: how about just plain old -- without a trailing space and the mainweb name?

Everybody is already using it most of the time anyway, and, this is the way it appears in the same in edit and view mode. We'd just be dropping some intervening characters, which I think users would adjust to pretty quickly. This method is also quite similar to the way a lot of people sign email, so we'd be leveraging existing muscle memory.

The actual location of the user and group pages would still be % MAINWEB% , and % MAINWEB%.TWikiGuest would still work, because those pages are still twiki topics.

Sign me --MattWilkie 17 Sep 2002

Here's another idea to mull over. We need to try to stay focused in this topic. Perhaps the real discussion of this topic has gone elsewhere, I'm not sure. This is definately a post BeijingRelease issue. However due to it's fundamental nature it's important not to screw it up if it gets changed at all. I too see users not understand what Main really does. The terms that we have used up to now have served a purpose, but I think with growth, competition, increased adoption by less technical users AND the confusion of the names to both users and administrators alike new names need to be strongly considered. I want to emphasize that Peter did NOT make WRONG decisions about any of this. He was faced with a WickedProblem. smile He just used terminology that he thought would work. He did what was necessary. TWiki is an amazing tool and I think will just keep getting better.

Home may be a good choice to rename Main. User as Peter pointed out in the beginning is really a subset of what the TWiki web/zone really does. I was thinking about users, groups and offices. What are all these objects often stored in? A directory like LDAP, right? So how about this?

Dir.UserName NEW

Dir.GroupName NEW

Dir.OfficeName NEW

With some fancy plugins in the future I could see this as being mostly a pass-through module, but a TWiki DISPLAY of the data in the actual directory. There might also be a feature to pass-through display the data in an LDAP directory AND append what we know now as a TWiki user page with preferences and such that is specific to TWiki.

There is also a new plugin that handles the case of not typing the Main. or Dir. in front of names. Plugins.FindElsewherePlugin.

RemoveAllDefaultWebsExceptTwiki -- GrantBow - 17 Jan 200

-- GrantBow - 16 Jan 2003

Just feel like adding a small (but important!) comment. If you're already planning on sitewide renames and this sort of implications, then please also consider the awkward word TWiki itself... I understand that's the name of the tool, but come on, it's a very awkward word to type -- not least due to the nonsensical uppercase/lowercase. Considering that TWiki is even case-sensitive, it only adds to the confusion and error-rate. When should I type twiki? Twiki? TWiki? TWIKI? It's not exactly a user-friendly word.

Please don't get me wrong: I love the tool, but from a usability perspective, I hate the name.

-- TorbenGB - 16 Jan 2003

Can you please start a new topic via FeatureBrainstorming and put your comment there? I'll share my thoughts when you do. Thank you!

This discussion is long and complicated enough as it is sticking to the rename of Main to blah for some value of blah. smile

-- GrantBow - 16 Jan 2003

I know discussion will continue for a while, so my first comment may be totally unnecessary, but I don't want to see us rush into a change from Main to Home -- Home just doesn't (at least at first hearing) cut it for me -- on twiki, I think of Home as being WebHome, not my home page. Also, I very rarely put any "real" content on my home page -- it stores my user info, preferences, and could store important (meta) data (like SupportMoinMoinStyleBookmarks) in the future.

Out of curiosity, how many people "actively" use their home page for discussion? On other wikis, I have put notes for people on their home page if I couldn't contact them any other way, or had something of a semi-personal nature to discuss. Otherwise, IMHO, discussion should occur on other appropriately named wiki pages.

PS: I think the TWiki / twiki / Twiki discussion has occurred on some other page -- maybe discussion should continue there (or the new page should have links to these old discussions, as they are found).

-- RandyKramer - 16 Jan 2003

Moved the issue of the name TWiki to topic RenameTWiki.

-- TorbenGB - 17 Jan 2003

Wow, this suggestion is scheduled for Cairo?

-- GrantBow - 02 Feb 2003

It's on the "Nice to Have" list having been pushed back from BeijingRelease.

-- SamHasler - 03 Feb 2003

This issue is just another aspect of a bigger issue: one level of flat structure, webs, is just too bloody limiting. What is needed is a recursive hierarchy of directories, folders, whatever, just like in a filesystem. E.g. it might look like

  • Administrative
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Offices
  • Content
    • Project1
      • Subweb1
      • Subweb2
    • Project2
      • Subweb1
      • Subweb2

With names as full, absolute, paths - possibly /Administrative/Users/UserName, /Content/Project1/Subweb1/TopicName.

Relative pathname support - relative to the "web" or folder that the current user finds himself in - is natural.

For those who want shorter names, like User.JoeLast the concept of a PATH can be added. E.g. the PATH might be ".;/Content", etc.

-- AndyGlew - 15 Apr 2003

See MegaTWiki for an implementation of hierarchical webs.

-- RichardDonkin - 15 Apr 2003

I think hierachical webs can be a bad idea if it maps on the URLs. In my experience, hierarchies must be sometime moved around. If the webs are all in a flat space, and the hierarchy is provided by navigation aids only, then rearranging the hierrachy do not break the URLs

In the KoalaSkin, I made things this way, and it works quite well. I added a way to have abbrevs for web names, for instance in the interface you see Graphics/Tools and Optim/Tools webs, but they are abbrevs to webs Graphics_Tools and Optim_Tools in a flat space.

In my company, people seem to model webs according to teams. But every year or so, there is a reorganisation and teams changes. having a system able to survive this is important...

-- ColasNahaboo - 15 Apr 2003

I put forth a use-file-system-for-organization proposal in the TWikiBlosxom.

Colas' point about periodic reorganizing is a good one, but I don't see much difference between reorganizing a web and reorganizing a heirarchy. They both break external URLs (e.g. bookmarks) but internally TWiki tracks these kinds of changes and updates the links accordingly.

-- MattWilkie - 15 Apr 2003

The problem is that reorganising the web is done by the page authors, they are conscious of the impact of the changes (and a bit lazy, too smile so these reorganisations are sparse.

However, deciding a team name change, or deciding that it is of the utmost importance that web "Documentation_Tools" must be now be "under" Engineering rather than Doc (and the opposite in 6 months :-), can happen easily in the mind of a manager and commited to stone without taking the consequences on the intranet.

Of course, you must then try to drive people into creating webs that describe actual activities, not just reflect the current organisation "en vogue" at the time, so that they will survive the changes... this is the hardest part smile

-- ColasNahaboo - 15 Apr 2003

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r44 < r43 < r42 < r41 < r40 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r44 - 2006-04-29 - SamHasler
  • Learn about TWiki  
  • Download TWiki
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by Perl Hosted by OICcam.com Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback. Ask community in the support forum.
Copyright © 1999-2018 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.