• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag
 

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Getting Started With WO site
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Getting Started With WO site


  • Subject: Re: Getting Started With WO site
  • From: Florijan Stamenkovic <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 20:48:59 +0200

Hi all,


What used to be true:
1. Apple used to provide the "getting started with..." tutorials, of good quality. Not anymore.
2. The same documentation also provided decent architectural overviews of EOF and WO.
3. You could always go back to those docs and find the same text telling more then the last time you read it.
4. Once you would hit a wall (no matter how simple it actually is) the community was more then helpful.
5. Once you get better at it, there was a bunch of other stuff to explore (EOGenerator, WOnder, best practices, etc), but there already one would bump into lack of documentation and motivation (no obvious reason WHY one would want to try to make sense out of all the stuff out there).


Now when WO dev has fallen from the Apple, the situation is quite different for beginners. Apple's docs are deprecated, probably not even on the site anymore. Eclipse and WO and WOLips are much to tackle all at once even if one had great docs. The exposure of the technology is minimal. There is no realistic entrance.

In my eyes any kind of collaborative effort needs to be to some degree centralized. I think in this situation one of the problems is that a bunch of excellent developers are trying to fill in a gap, without effective coordination. I think that what WO needs to thrive is a central repository of resources, one that matches Apple's docs.

In short, somebody should take on the job of NOT writing tutorials but weaving all the resources together, and bridging individuals who do great work in writing the stuff. Forget about wiki. To attract new people a place that has it all is needed. The propaganda talk, the tutorials, the overviews, the nice pictures, the success stories, the specialized areas... Up to date. Stuff to get you both hooked and going. Everything about core WO, and preferably some info and linking to popular third party extensions. No one person alone can do it, but also one hundred excellent individuals working alone or in small groups can not do it. That approach is history.

Two cents,
Flor


I think that the wikibook is a fantastic resource for reference if you have a specific problem.

It is not the best place to get the context for why you might be needing some of the advice in the wikibook.

Everyone who contributes where ever they can are going to give context for why they're doing certain things. Whether it's a blog like Keiran's that addressed all of his problems as a beginner and how he found the solutions (and what solutions he found) or like Mike's expert WOTips group. Some information is more appropriate one place than another. I agree with Janine that everyone should do what they want and let the "market" sort out the most valuable contributions to the community. I have found that my present concerns tend more towards the topics at the WOLips wiki and I really like the interface for posting screenshots etc. on that wiki. It doesn't mean that I don't find the "main" wiki useful, it is just not the place I want to be putting my 2 cents right now. That will change as I move onto other topics. It also doesn't stop anyone from referencing the material from the WOLips wiki in the other one. They're both very useful in their contexts.

If there is a tacit agreement that anything (blogs, tutorials, mailing lists) is fair game for reference in the wikibook, that would be great. I think that a small problem with the wikibook is that when Mike set it up he asked those who gave permission for their posts to be placed on the wikibook to contact him, and not every poster back into the lists' history gave that permission. Sometimes I have doubts about how much I am actually able to cut and paste in a quick and dirty way from the mailing lists into wikibook topics.

David's new site would be really useful if he can provide the "beginner's" context for other sites/references for specific topics going forward. The opportunity for contributing in many different places is all good.

And this is all just my opinion ;-) Cheers,

David


On 14 Jun 2007, at 9:22 AM, Steven Mark McCraw wrote:

Agreed. How do we (and I guess by we I mean everybody on this list) come to an agreement on the one place that should be the definitive posting grounds? Honestly, I sometimes find navigating the wiki book less than ideal, but it's kind of a minor irritation that I can live with if it solves the problem of a central repository, and there's so much there already that it seems like the most logical place to me. Whatever it is, it should be publicly editable, I think, and it has to be searchable and individual articles must be linkable. Is anybody in disagreement that the wiki book is the best place ongoing to post information? If so, can we start an effort to shuttle information posted elsewhere into the wiki book if it is missing? If not, what are alternative suggestions for the central repository of information?

Thanks,
Mark

On Jun 14, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Dana Kashubeck wrote:

On 6/14/07 11:57 AM, Steven Mark McCraw wrote:
My understanding is that the webobjects wiki book (http:// en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:WebObjects) is trying to become the central point of documentation for WebObjects that people post to. There's already a ton of info there, but we all know it could use a ton more. At WOWODC, when the experts panel was asked what could be done to help with project wonder, this is what they came back with immediately: We need people writing documentation, and this is the place to put it. Even if it's bad, there are so many people watching it that bad info will get edited out quickly.
I think there's a danger in having TOO many informational sites. If everybody decides to wing it because they get on a high at a developer's conference regarding being able to document stuff to widen the movement, I think we will end up with dozens of blogs, half finished tutorials, etc. There's a reason there isn't much documentation on Wonder and WebObjects: writing good documentation is HARD and time consuming, and not a very glamorous task. So if you have 10 spare hours to write a decent article on a very specific issue, I think everybody would be better served if that went to the wikibook. That way, everybody can always point to one resource as definitive.
I don't mean to be preachy about it or rain on anybody's parade that is putting up yet another site about WebObjects. What I just wrote might sound snappy or mean, but I don't mean it that way. I'm just trying to advocate a central repository for everything so people don't have to go here and there to get various pieces of the overall puzzle. Maybe if you start a site, you could also make sure that all of the contents of that site are also posted in the wiki book in the sensible place? Thoughts?
I was thinking the same thing. Last year there were some really great efforts to put together "the site" for WebObjects information. I think it was this one: http:// wiki.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOCOM/WOCOM

So there's that wiki, the wiki book, www.wocommunity.org, etc., etc. I completely agree that there is a huge need for documentation and resources and it is important for the community to put these things together. But right now everything just seems *so* scattered! Can those who have been generous enough with their time please post their content on one of the already existing sites?

--
-------------------------------------
Dana Kashubeck
Systems Manager
Riemer Reporting Service Inc.
http://www.riemer.com

Phone: 440-835-2477 x. 125
Fax:   440-835-4594
-------------------------------------

<dana.kashubeck.vcf>

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
email@hidden


This email sent to email@hidden

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
40mac.com


This email sent to email@hidden

_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
References: 
 >Getting Started With WO site (From: David LeBer <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Getting Started With WO site (From: Janine Sisk <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Getting Started With WO site (From: Steven Mark McCraw <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Getting Started With WO site (From: Dana Kashubeck <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Getting Started With WO site (From: Steven Mark McCraw <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Getting Started With WO site (From: David Holt <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: historical context ...
  • Next by Date: Re: WO 5.3.3/Tiger/No template found for component
  • Previous by thread: Re: Getting Started With WO site
  • Next by thread: Re: Getting Started With WO site
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread