Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [pepysdiary] Background Info editors

Expand Messages
  • Todd Bernhardt
    I d be interested in this. I couldn t be responsible for too many pages -- damn this having-to-work-for-a-living thing! -- but could definitely pick a couple
    Message 1 of 9 , Aug 22 10:26 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I'd be interested in this. I couldn't be responsible for too many pages -- damn this
      having-to-work-for-a-living thing! -- but could definitely pick a couple up.

      Would we be responsible for individual pages (of which there are many, with more to come, I
      assume) or sections?

      --- Phil Gyford <phil@...> wrote:

      > Hi,
      >
      > I've been thinking that some of the background info entries aren't
      > ideal as reference pages - once there are many annotations it's a lot
      > of unordered material to read, and there's no telling where the most
      > relevant bits will be. And because these pages are used over the life
      > of the diary, some of the older annotations may contain links or
      > information that no longer work.
      >
      > So I was wondering if this would be a good solution...
      >
      > Anyone can claim "ownership" of one or several background info pages
      > and become its editor. They would be able to write an
      > encyclopedia-style summary of the topic, and update it whenever they
      > like. The editor could use material from the existing annotations and
      > do new research if they thought it was needed.
      >
      > Of course, assuming this is a good idea, it relies on there being
      > people who'd like to adopt one or more pages. So does it sound a good
      > idea? Would you like to be an editor? If we go ahead it'll probably
      > be a few weeks before I can implement it, but it should be a useful
      > thing for everyone without too much work for me (always a good
      > combination!).
      >
      > Phil
      >
      >
      >
      > --
      > Phil Gyford
      > http://www.gyford.com/
      > tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
      > aim: philgyford
      >
    • Phil Gyford
      ... Individual pages. Obviously, it s unlikely we d find editors for every page, but there are a huge number of pages where there s little or nothing to say
      Message 2 of 9 , Aug 22 10:41 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        At 10:26 -0700 2006-08-22, Todd Bernhardt wrote:
        >I'd be interested in this. I couldn't be responsible for too many
        >pages -- damn this
        >having-to-work-for-a-living thing! -- but could definitely pick a couple up.
        >
        >Would we be responsible for individual pages (of which there are
        >many, with more to come, I
        >assume) or sections?

        Individual pages. Obviously, it's unlikely we'd find editors for
        every page, but there are a huge number of pages where there's little
        or nothing to say about a person/subject. And even if we only provide
        a useful encyclopedia-like summary or collection of links for a
        handful of pages, that's an improvement over what we have now.

        Phil


        >
        >--- Phil Gyford <phil@...> wrote:
        >
        >> Hi,
        >>
        >> I've been thinking that some of the background info entries aren't
        >> ideal as reference pages - once there are many annotations it's a lot
        >> of unordered material to read, and there's no telling where the most
        >> relevant bits will be. And because these pages are used over the life
        >> of the diary, some of the older annotations may contain links or
        >> information that no longer work.
        >>
        >> So I was wondering if this would be a good solution...
        >>
        >> Anyone can claim "ownership" of one or several background info pages
        >> and become its editor. They would be able to write an
        >> encyclopedia-style summary of the topic, and update it whenever they
        >> like. The editor could use material from the existing annotations and
        >> do new research if they thought it was needed.
        >>
        >> Of course, assuming this is a good idea, it relies on there being
        >> people who'd like to adopt one or more pages. So does it sound a good
        >> idea? Would you like to be an editor? If we go ahead it'll probably
        >> be a few weeks before I can implement it, but it should be a useful
        >> thing for everyone without too much work for me (always a good
        >> combination!).
        >>
        >> Phil
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> --
        >> Phil Gyford
        >> http://www.gyford.com/
        >> tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
        >> aim: philgyford
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >

        --
        Phil Gyford
        http://www.gyford.com/
        tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
        aim: philgyford
      • Todd Bernhardt
        Makes sense. Thanks!
        Message 3 of 9 , Aug 22 10:54 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Makes sense. Thanks!

          --- Phil Gyford <phil@...> wrote:

          > At 10:26 -0700 2006-08-22, Todd Bernhardt wrote:
          > >I'd be interested in this. I couldn't be responsible for too many
          > >pages -- damn this
          > >having-to-work-for-a-living thing! -- but could definitely pick a couple up.
          > >
          > >Would we be responsible for individual pages (of which there are
          > >many, with more to come, I assume) or sections?
          >
          > Individual pages. Obviously, it's unlikely we'd find editors for
          > every page, but there are a huge number of pages where there's little
          > or nothing to say about a person/subject. And even if we only provide
          > a useful encyclopedia-like summary or collection of links for a
          > handful of pages, that's an improvement over what we have now.
          >
          > Phil
        • Terry Foreman
          I m with Todd, but am retired, though like others in this category, busy with other.commitments. There are indeed broken links (reorganized and deleted
          Message 4 of 9 , Aug 22 12:07 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            I'm with Todd, but am retired, though like others in this category,
            busy with other.commitments.

            There are indeed broken links (reorganized and deleted
            websites/pages) that can, in many cases be fixed.

            Monitoring a clutch of them seems realistic.

            Terry

            At 06:41 PM 8/22/2006 +0100, you wrote:
            >At 10:26 -0700 2006-08-22, Todd Bernhardt wrote:
            > >I'd be interested in this. I couldn't be responsible for too many
            > >pages -- damn this
            > >having-to-work-for-a-living thing! -- but could definitely pick a couple up.
            > >
            > >Would we be responsible for individual pages (of which there are
            > >many, with more to come, I
            > >assume) or sections?
            >
            >Individual pages. Obviously, it's unlikely we'd find editors for
            >every page, but there are a huge number of pages where there's little
            >or nothing to say about a person/subject. And even if we only provide
            >a useful encyclopedia-like summary or collection of links for a
            >handful of pages, that's an improvement over what we have now.
            >
            >Phil
            >
            >
            > >
            > >--- Phil Gyford <phil@...> wrote:
            > >
            > >> Hi,
            > >>
            > >> I've been thinking that some of the background info entries aren't
            > >> ideal as reference pages - once there are many annotations it's a lot
            > >> of unordered material to read, and there's no telling where the most
            > >> relevant bits will be. And because these pages are used over the life
            > >> of the diary, some of the older annotations may contain links or
            > >> information that no longer work.
            > >>
            > >> So I was wondering if this would be a good solution...
            > >>
            > >> Anyone can claim "ownership" of one or several background info pages
            > >> and become its editor. They would be able to write an
            > >> encyclopedia-style summary of the topic, and update it whenever they
            > >> like. The editor could use material from the existing annotations and
            > >> do new research if they thought it was needed.
            > >>
            > >> Of course, assuming this is a good idea, it relies on there being
            > >> people who'd like to adopt one or more pages. So does it sound a good
            > >> idea? Would you like to be an editor? If we go ahead it'll probably
            > >> be a few weeks before I can implement it, but it should be a useful
            > >> thing for everyone without too much work for me (always a good
            > >> combination!).
            > >>
            > >> Phil
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >> --
            > >> Phil Gyford
            > >> http://www.gyford.com/
            > >> tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
            > >> aim: philgyford
            > >>
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >--
            >Phil Gyford
            >http://www.gyford.com/
            >tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
            >aim: philgyford
            >
            >
            >
            >Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Susan Thomas
            ** Low Priority ** Could I do Religion? And Food? have great personal (and professional) interest in both..... Susan ... I m with Todd, but am retired, though
            Message 5 of 9 , Aug 22 3:28 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              ** Low Priority **

              Could I do Religion? And Food? have great personal (and professional) interest in both.....
              Susan

              >>> terry.foreman@... 23/08/2006 5:07 am >>>
              I'm with Todd, but am retired, though like others in this category,
              busy with other.commitments.

              There are indeed broken links (reorganized and deleted
              websites/pages) that can, in many cases be fixed.

              Monitoring a clutch of them seems realistic.

              Terry

              At 06:41 PM 8/22/2006 +0100, you wrote:
              >At 10:26 -0700 2006-08-22, Todd Bernhardt wrote:
              > >I'd be interested in this. I couldn't be responsible for too many
              > >pages -- damn this
              > >having-to-work-for-a-living thing! -- but could definitely pick a couple up.
              > >
              > >Would we be responsible for individual pages (of which there are
              > >many, with more to come, I
              > >assume) or sections?
              >
              >Individual pages. Obviously, it's unlikely we'd find editors for
              >every page, but there are a huge number of pages where there's little
              >or nothing to say about a person/subject. And even if we only provide
              >a useful encyclopedia-like summary or collection of links for a
              >handful of pages, that's an improvement over what we have now.
              >
              >Phil
              >
              >
              > >
              > >--- Phil Gyford <phil@...> wrote:
              > >
              > >> Hi,
              > >>
              > >> I've been thinking that some of the background info entries aren't
              > >> ideal as reference pages - once there are many annotations it's a lot
              > >> of unordered material to read, and there's no telling where the most
              > >> relevant bits will be. And because these pages are used over the life
              > >> of the diary, some of the older annotations may contain links or
              > >> information that no longer work.
              > >>
              > >> So I was wondering if this would be a good solution...
              > >>
              > >> Anyone can claim "ownership" of one or several background info pages
              > >> and become its editor. They would be able to write an
              > >> encyclopedia-style summary of the topic, and update it whenever they
              > >> like. The editor could use material from the existing annotations and
              > >> do new research if they thought it was needed.
              > >>
              > >> Of course, assuming this is a good idea, it relies on there being
              > >> people who'd like to adopt one or more pages. So does it sound a good
              > >> idea? Would you like to be an editor? If we go ahead it'll probably
              > >> be a few weeks before I can implement it, but it should be a useful
              > >> thing for everyone without too much work for me (always a good
              > >> combination!).
              > >>
              > >> Phil
              > >>
              > >>
              > >>
              > >> --
              > >> Phil Gyford
              > >> http://www.gyford.com/
              > >> tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
              > >> aim: philgyford
              > >>
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              >--
              >Phil Gyford
              >http://www.gyford.com/
              >tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
              >aim: philgyford
              >
              >
              >
              >Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >





              Yahoo! Groups Links
            • Todd Bernhardt
              Okay, Susan, you can t just say that without telling us more ... dish, dish! :^)
              Message 6 of 9 , Aug 22 5:53 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                Okay, Susan, you can't just say that without telling us more ... dish, dish! :^)



                --- Susan Thomas <susan.thomas@...> wrote:

                > ** Low Priority **
                >
                > Could I do Religion? And Food? have great personal (and professional) interest in both.....
                > Susan
                >
                > >>> terry.foreman@... 23/08/2006 5:07 am >>>
                > I'm with Todd, but am retired, though like others in this category,
                > busy with other.commitments.
                >
                > There are indeed broken links (reorganized and deleted
                > websites/pages) that can, in many cases be fixed.
                >
                > Monitoring a clutch of them seems realistic.
                >
                > Terry
                >
                > At 06:41 PM 8/22/2006 +0100, you wrote:
                > >At 10:26 -0700 2006-08-22, Todd Bernhardt wrote:
                > > >I'd be interested in this. I couldn't be responsible for too many
                > > >pages -- damn this
                > > >having-to-work-for-a-living thing! -- but could definitely pick a couple up.
                > > >
                > > >Would we be responsible for individual pages (of which there are
                > > >many, with more to come, I
                > > >assume) or sections?
                > >
                > >Individual pages. Obviously, it's unlikely we'd find editors for
                > >every page, but there are a huge number of pages where there's little
                > >or nothing to say about a person/subject. And even if we only provide
                > >a useful encyclopedia-like summary or collection of links for a
                > >handful of pages, that's an improvement over what we have now.
                > >
                > >Phil
                > >
                > >
                > > >
                > > >--- Phil Gyford <phil@...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > >> Hi,
                > > >>
                > > >> I've been thinking that some of the background info entries aren't
                > > >> ideal as reference pages - once there are many annotations it's a lot
                > > >> of unordered material to read, and there's no telling where the most
                > > >> relevant bits will be. And because these pages are used over the life
                > > >> of the diary, some of the older annotations may contain links or
                > > >> information that no longer work.
                > > >>
                > > >> So I was wondering if this would be a good solution...
                > > >>
                > > >> Anyone can claim "ownership" of one or several background info pages
                > > >> and become its editor. They would be able to write an
                > > >> encyclopedia-style summary of the topic, and update it whenever they
                > > >> like. The editor could use material from the existing annotations and
                > > >> do new research if they thought it was needed.
                > > >>
                > > >> Of course, assuming this is a good idea, it relies on there being
                > > >> people who'd like to adopt one or more pages. So does it sound a good
                > > >> idea? Would you like to be an editor? If we go ahead it'll probably
                > > >> be a few weeks before I can implement it, but it should be a useful
                > > >> thing for everyone without too much work for me (always a good
                > > >> combination!).
                > > >>
                > > >> Phil
                > > >>
                > > >>
                > > >>
                > > >> --
                > > >> Phil Gyford
                > > >> http://www.gyford.com/
                > > >> tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
                > > >> aim: philgyford
                > > >>
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > >
                > >--
                > >Phil Gyford
                > >http://www.gyford.com/
                > >tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
                > >aim: philgyford
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • Pauline Benson
                Hi Phil, This is a good idea! Reasonable too. I would especially support an editing that retained to-the-point annotations along with any compilation or
                Message 7 of 9 , Aug 22 7:45 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Phil,

                  This is a good idea! Reasonable too.

                  I would especially support an editing that retained to-the-point
                  annotations along with any compilation or "digest" done by the
                  editors. There is some background information that we have frequently
                  referred to as events unfolded---such as Uncle Robert and his will,
                  Lady Castlemain, and the Sir Wms---that will need to be handled
                  carefully so as to remain the familiar groundings for reading with
                  understanding that they have become.

                  I'm interested in taking responsibility for a page or three.

                  Thanks for it all,
                  Pauline



                  On 8/22/06, Phil Gyford <phil@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Hi,
                  >
                  > I've been thinking that some of the background info entries aren't
                  > ideal as reference pages - once there are many annotations it's a lot
                  > of unordered material to read, and there's no telling where the most
                  > relevant bits will be. And because these pages are used over the life
                  > of the diary, some of the older annotations may contain links or
                  > information that no longer work.
                  >
                  > So I was wondering if this would be a good solution...
                  >
                  > Anyone can claim "ownership" of one or several background info pages
                  > and become its editor. They would be able to write an
                  > encyclopedia-style summary of the topic, and update it whenever they
                  > like. The editor could use material from the existing annotations and
                  > do new research if they thought it was needed.
                  >
                  > Of course, assuming this is a good idea, it relies on there being
                  > people who'd like to adopt one or more pages. So does it sound a good
                  > idea? Would you like to be an editor? If we go ahead it'll probably
                  > be a few weeks before I can implement it, but it should be a useful
                  > thing for everyone without too much work for me (always a good
                  > combination!).
                  >
                  > Phil
                  >
                  > --
                  > Phil Gyford
                  > http://www.gyford.com/
                  > tel: +44 (0)7866 436847
                  > aim: philgyford
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.