Should DITL now include Discovery?

Discovery

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby IanKennedy » Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:55 am

One of the major differences between us and a WiKi is the backend database. Ours is hand crafted for the things it holds. Take ships for example. Our ships pages are produced from, what is effectively, three large tables of data. All the items you see in the ships page header is categorised and coded and then retrieved and collated into the pages you see. The magic is that there is only one ships page (well ok one for each of the tabs it has (specs, images, internals etc). To make an improvement to every ships page we have only to edit the one page and change the data tables. For example:

8472 Bioship

That advantage of this is that we can use that data in any number of ways. For example we use the very same data in the fleets pages:

8472 Fleet

It's also used in the size charts pages, the lists section ship classes and ship names pages.

A wiki by comparison is simply a page edited over time by a number of people. If you wanted a list of ships that is maintained separately. A wiki size comparison page would either be an image or a page created by hand with scaled image on it. On a wiki if you change one ship you have to go and work on each and every place that ship is represented.

The place we loose is that we're only two people. Graham writes every piece of text on the site and I do the database coding and layout. There's only so much effort we can put in. That's why out books and games lists are likely not very up to date.
email, ergo spam
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5297
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby IanKennedy » Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:57 am

Another thing that our site has is referencing. Sure a good wiki has references for the data, however, we mine that information in a much broader way. It's not just footnotes on a page. It's used to construct the datapoints pages, to run the quiz pages and sudden death.
email, ergo spam
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5297
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby Graham Kennedy » Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:41 pm

I love our referencing system. Essentially what we have is a list of all the references, each given a number. So the Next Gen Tech Manual is #1000, DS9 Tech Manual is #1001, The Motion Picture is #2000, Wrath of Khan is #2001, Search For Spock is #2002... and so on, for every movie, every episode, every book, etc.

To reference it I just write text like this :

{Kirk returned to command of the Enterprise after two and a half years as Chief of Starfleet Operations in order to deal with the V'Ger crisis.#2000'Kirk says it has been this long}{ He subsequently transferred to Starfleet to command the Academy, but was once again called to action when Khan Singh captured the USS Reliant.#2001}

The system will take all the text between the { } and automatically reference it to the numbered source, with a link to the page for that source - and that page will automatically generate links to every place on the site the reference is used. It also knows the canon status of each source and will automatically colour the text accordingly. Anything after the ' mark is added to the reference as a comment.

All that happens automatically, with no input from me when I write it. It's a very neat system and works extremely well.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11167
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby IanKennedy » Mon Mar 12, 2018 4:24 pm

For simpler things we also have fields in the database that reference their companion field. For example The number of phasers a ship has is a field in the database. Lets say it's called NumPhasers, for this there will also be another field called NumPhasersR which is the reference that tells us the source of that information. The datapoint system looks for these numbers and collates a page listing all the uses of a given reference, either in an 'R' field or in a notes body as #1001} form.

How did we come up with that. Graham said it would be good to reference the source of the information, I designed and built the system to make it possible.
email, ergo spam
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5297
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby DarkMoineau » Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:05 pm

And that's a wonderful work.
If you want to ask me, this avatar is a resized version of "The War Come Home" by Davemetlesits found on DeviantArt
DarkMoineau
Lieutenant jg
Lieutenant jg
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:03 am

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby Startrekanmore » Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:11 am

Short form, NO
Startrekanmore
Petty officer first class
Petty officer first class
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 1:53 am
Location: Cleveland

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby DSG2k » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:02 pm

So here's the thing. It's a question of completeness versus telling it to eff off . . . and with it, traffic.

For me, traffic is not as relevant as conceptual purity, as it were, so I don't care to even touch the JJ-verse or CBS Canon. But, as the number of CBS Canon shows grows, any of those viewers (however few there are) with a passing interest in the ships who applies Bing-fu won't end up at DITL. It's up to you to decide if that's cool with you.

Ideally, I would think the best outcome would be to serve as editor. For instance, if someone wanted a section at my site dealing with the new Disney canon for Star Wars (the Star Wars Third Universe (SW3U)), or even that versus the JJ crap, I'd carve out a spot in the guest author section and let 'em rip.

For you, here, with the unique back end, maybe you could set up some guidelines amd offer to have it on the site, but separate (unlike Memory Alpha which is turning into a giant fustercluck in dire need of a forking).

The main thing for me is that I, for one, wouldn't want to show up here and have silly fighter-pilot-named NEM-era looking crap all around TOS Constitutions and TMP Mirandas, or BS about Romulus from the JJ-inspired Picard show treated as a valid follow-on to TNG.

Just a thought.
User avatar
DSG2k
Ensign
Ensign
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:39 am

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby IanKennedy » Mon Jan 21, 2019 9:48 am

The thing to consider, we are not a collaborative effort site. The entire made site is produced by Graham and the technical guts that make it work by me. There can be no concept of carving out an area and letting people create at will. That is different from the forum, obviously. We already a DSC forum before it even came out, which is where this post is sitting :)
email, ergo spam
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5297
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby DSG2k » Mon Jan 21, 2019 11:25 pm

Oh, I wasn't imagining a wiki-style thing. As per the reference to the unique back end and having seen Graham's post about the reference system, you two would be serving as editors of work submitted, e.g. by e-mail, following guidelines you laid down in a probably-lengthy formatting guide.

I have a closed and currently-unpublicized wiki format thing that'd have similar needs becsuse of the unique requirements of a plugin.
User avatar
DSG2k
Ensign
Ensign
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:39 am

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby IanKennedy » Tue Jan 22, 2019 10:07 am

You could never do what we do with a Wiki, it would be an enormous amount of effort. Accuracy would also take a massive dive. Take ships for example. We have a bespoke database of ship information. There are literally a 100 or more columns of information in that table. That information is presented in the individual ship page, the fleets pages, the size comparison page, the ships list, the ship names list, the ship strength calculator page and the fleet strength calculator page. That's a total of about a dozen pages in all. On a Wiki each of these pages would have to be managed as a separate page, each kept up-to-date and in sync with each other, it simply wouldn't be practical.
email, ergo spam
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5297
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby DSG2k » Wed Jan 23, 2019 2:16 am

Sorry if I was unclear again. In no way was I suggesting that anything comes close to your backend's awesomeness. I was simply noting that, were I to invite others to contribute to my wiki (which has unique formatting needs due to a plugin that allows for dynamic inclusion of sections from other pages, provided they are formatted properly), I would have to have a "writer's guide" that was long and detailed, just as you would if someone else wanted to contribute here.

Again, in no way am I suggesting a technological similarity between the two systems or in any way suggesting a wiki could replicate the DITL backend badassery (which, as noted, I have seen Graham refer to (mostly from the writer's side) in sporadic posts, e.g. the reference system with #1001, et cetera)… only a similarity in guest author training needs. Oh, and not the *content* of those needs in the writer's guide either, just the voluminous nature of it.

Does that clear up what I was trying to say? Sorry I didn't realize I was being unclear. I'm just saying if you invited anyone to contribute Disco stuff you two would basically have to write a document for them detailing how Graham does basic writing tasks for inclusion and, after they submitted the text (e.g. via e-mail), edit/correct and include/upload it, preferably under a new separate area (as from a site visitor's navigation perspective) distinct from all the Graham-written info.

Again, I am not suggesting such a thing is the best path… just an option.
User avatar
DSG2k
Ensign
Ensign
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:39 am

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby Startrekanmore » Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:02 pm

Mikey wrote:
Sonic Glitch wrote:Are we going to blatantly ignore the production word of God that it is in the prime universe? Are we as a community so arrogant as to think we know better than the production company?


Yep.

I second that!
Startrekanmore
Petty officer first class
Petty officer first class
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 1:53 am
Location: Cleveland

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby Startrekanmore » Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:19 pm

If STD is to be included, then I move that it should be handled as the jj-verse has be handled here including a name change of this forum to "Alex-verse", "Discovery Universe", or "Kurtzman-verse or some such. You see I am being polite [by suggesting not something like ST:INO {In Name Only}].

The 25% difference from Paramount's Trek disqualifies it from being in the jj-verse and despite the appearance of Christopher Pike {who is one of the two or three decent characters on the show {Tilly and the navigator with the Borg-like appliance on her face being the other two}}.


STnM

http://www.geocitoes.ws/asimovstamp
Startrekanmore
Petty officer first class
Petty officer first class
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 1:53 am
Location: Cleveland

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby IanKennedy » Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:45 am

Startrekanmore wrote:If STD is to be included, then I move that it should be handled as the jj-verse has be handled here including a name change of this forum to "Alex-verse", "Discovery Universe", or "Kurtzman-verse or some such. You see I am being polite [by suggesting not something like ST:INO {In Name Only}].

The 25% difference from Paramount's Trek disqualifies it from being in the jj-verse and despite the appearance of Christopher Pike {who is one of the two or three decent characters on the show {Tilly and the navigator with the Borg-like appliance on her face being the other two}}.


STnM

http://www.geocitoes.ws/asimovstamp

Personally I think it should be called STD
email, ergo spam
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5297
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: Should DITL now include Discovery?

Postby DSG2k » Sun Mar 10, 2019 1:07 am

Well, "STD" *is* officially used in their marketing.

https://mobile.twitter.com/STvSW/status ... 1513188353
User avatar
DSG2k
Ensign
Ensign
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:39 am

Previous

Return to DSC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest