wiki wonderings

I've been pondering the idea of a microtonal wiki, which Andrew first suggested to me. (A
wiki is a web of (mostly-text) webpages that may be edited by anyone at any time. A web
search will reveal much more about it than you will ever want to know!)

I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of
Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless
we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective
knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.

Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good
information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have
one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place
that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.

A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community.
The ones I think of include:

•"microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as
Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-
making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and
perhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them
want this)

•lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.

•a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and
discussion, sound examples of them.

•one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.

But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's
no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.

So where to start? We could either get run an open-source WikiEngine on somebody's
server, or start one on an existing "WikiFarm," or just leech onto an existing wiki. For the
latter option, take a look at www.composerplanet.com - to me its vision of helping
everybody make music is a more general version of what I am suggesting. But perhaps we
are a big enough community and this is a big enough subject that it needs its own place.

Talk to me.

--Jacob

Jacob,

{you wrote...}
>Talk to me.

If someone sets it up I'd be happy to contribute (as time allows). I could offer to hold up a mirror to the solutions I've found for myself, in terms of studio/electronic/recording oriented paths, and also share insights into the task of building one's own acoustic orchestra of instruments (based on my work in the Partch Ensemble).

Do you really think people would go to and/or find a resource like this?

Cheers,
Jon

my own experience with such things has not been favorable at all. The one for example in which i was mentioned was really completely off the mark if not down right false. i attempted to correct it only to have someone else come along and switch it to something else. There are so many disagreements with even the most basic assumptions that i for one would refuse to participate

Jacob wrote:

>I've been pondering the idea of a microtonal wiki, which Andrew first suggested to me. (A >wiki is a web of (mostly-text) webpages that may be edited by anyone at any time. A web >search will reveal much more about it than you will ever want to know!)
>
>I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of >Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless >we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective >knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.
>
>Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good >information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have >one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place >that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.
>
>A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community. >The ones I think of include:
>
>�"microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as >Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-
>making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and >perhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them >want this)
>
>�lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.
>
>�a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and >discussion, sound examples of them.
>
>�one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.
>
>But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's >no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.
>
>So where to start? We could either get run an open-source WikiEngine on somebody's >server, or start one on an existing "WikiFarm," or just leech onto an existing wiki. For the >latter option, take a look at www.composerplanet.com - to me its vision of helping >everybody make music is a more general version of what I am suggesting. But perhaps we >are a big enough community and this is a big enough subject that it needs its own place.
>
>Talk to me.
>
>--Jacob
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >

--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

>Talk to me.

This has been suggested before. The latest idea seemed
to be to get on Wikipedia. About a year ago, I put some
effort into cleaning up a few of the pages (which were
already) there.

But I think a dedicated Wiki would be wonderful. Set
one up and I'll be there!

-Carl

Carl Lumma wrote:

> This has been suggested before. The latest idea seemed
> to be to get on Wikipedia. About a year ago, I put some
> effort into cleaning up a few of the pages (which were
> already) there.

Wikipedia doesn't look appropriate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

> But I think a dedicated Wiki would be wonderful. Set
> one up and I'll be there!

Given the mess my own website's in, I'm reminded of the need to make backups and move it if needed. Make sure that, wherever it goes, there's some kind of community ownership. Other than that, the only way to tell if it will work is to set one up and see if it works.

Graham

>my own experience with such things has not been favorable at all. The
>one for example in which i was mentioned was really completely off the
>mark if not down right false. i attempted to correct it only to have
>someone else come along and switch it to something else. There are so
>many disagreements with even the most basic assumptions that i for one
>would refuse to participate

These things can (and do) happen, but it depends on the Wiki...
It depends on the vibe and the people. But also, it depends on
the page "pattern". Wikipedia uses one basic pattern -- the
creation of an expository article. There are other ways to make
an page. See...

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ThereforeBut

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ThereforeThen

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ThreadMode

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DocumentMode

-Carl

>> This has been suggested before. The latest idea seemed
>> to be to get on Wikipedia. About a year ago, I put some
>> effort into cleaning up a few of the pages (which were
>> already) there.
>
>Wikipedia doesn't look appropriate:
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

They break that *all* the time.

>> But I think a dedicated Wiki would be wonderful. Set
>> one up and I'll be there!
>
>Given the mess my own website's in, I'm reminded of the need to make
>backups and move it if needed. Make sure that, wherever it goes,
>there's some kind of community ownership. Other than that, the only
>way to tell if it will work is to set one up and see if it works.

True.

-Carl

Sounds great to me, I'm a big wiki fan.

- Dave

Jacob wrote:
> > I've been pondering the idea of a microtonal wiki, which Andrew first suggested to me. (A > wiki is a web of (mostly-text) webpages that may be edited by anyone at any time. A web > search will reveal much more about it than you will ever want to know!)
> > I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through archives of > Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of specific information. Doubtless > we can make things easier for first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective > knowledge (and opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.
> > Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of good > information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on things that I could have > one as well. But I'd much rather have a place where everyone could contribute, a place > that would not depend on one person having enough time to maintain it.
> > A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the community. > The ones I think of include:
> > �"microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of hardware-software setups as > Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument-
> making info, a list with the location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and > perhaps a way for composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them > want this)
> > �lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion and criticism.
> > �a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have created. and > discussion, sound examples of them.
> > �one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.
> > But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there. I guess there's > no need for a grand master plan before starting something so insanely open-ended.
> > So where to start? We could either get run an open-source WikiEngine on somebody's > server, or start one on an existing "WikiFarm," or just leech onto an existing wiki. For the > latter option, take a look at www.composerplanet.com - to me its vision of helping > everybody make music is a more general version of what I am suggesting. But perhaps we > are a big enough community and this is a big enough subject that it needs its own place.
> > Talk to me.
> > --Jacob
> > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > > >

This wiki idea must be in the air or something; I was just thinking about
trying out a microtonal wiki on my website.

In fact I think the wiki idea is in general a facinating one. Someone even
wrote an basic, but fully functional 11-line wiki app in Python, winning a
'small wiki' contest.

I literally was thinking of proposing this a couple of days ago. Since I have
lots of space right now on my site, I'd be willing to try a test version, and
maybe host the full version as long as it doesn't become too large (I have 1
gig total for my two sites)

--Aaron.

On Sunday 27 March 2005 01:48 am, Jacob wrote:
> I've been pondering the idea of a microtonal wiki, which Andrew first
> suggested to me. (A wiki is a web of (mostly-text) webpages that may be
> edited by anyone at any time. A web search will reveal much more about it
> than you will ever want to know!)
>
> I think that having one is a good idea, for many reasons. Dredging through
> archives of Yahoo groups is an inefficient way of finding any sort of
> specific information. Doubtless we can make things easier for
> first-timers, everyone really, if we can free our collective knowledge (and
> opinions) from the mandatory chronologically-based system here.
>
> Certainly there are many websites by members here and elsewhere full of
> good information. I already feel that I have enough of my own spin on
> things that I could have one as well. But I'd much rather have a place
> where everyone could contribute, a place that would not depend on one
> person having enough time to maintain it.
>
> A wiki could in time accomodate several things that would be good for the
> community. The ones I think of include:
>
> •"microtonal solutions" as I like to say; not only examples of
> hardware-software setups as Jon Szanto has repeatedly suggested but also
> acoustic solutions, experiencial instrument- making info, a list with the
> location of every known rare microtonal instrument, and perhaps a way for
> composers to write for such instruments (providing the curators of them
> want this)
>
> •lists of downloadable microtonal sounds and CD's, and perhaps discussion
> and criticism.
>
> •a catalogue of scales that people like, or have composed in, or have
> created. and discussion, sound examples of them.
>
> •one thing a wiki is great for, an FAQ. Everyone posts questions, answers.
>
> But ultimately the content of a wiki depends on what everyone wants there.
> I guess there's no need for a grand master plan before starting something
> so insanely open-ended.
>
> So where to start? We could either get run an open-source WikiEngine on
> somebody's server, or start one on an existing "WikiFarm," or just leech
> onto an existing wiki. For the latter option, take a look at
> www.composerplanet.com - to me its vision of helping everybody make music
> is a more general version of what I am suggesting. But perhaps we are a
> big enough community and this is a big enough subject that it needs its own
> place.
>
> Talk to me.
>
> --Jacob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------

On Monday 28 March 2005 12:05 am, Carl Lumma wrote:
> >Talk to me.
>
> This has been suggested before. The latest idea seemed
> to be to get on Wikipedia. About a year ago, I put some
> effort into cleaning up a few of the pages (which were
> already) there.
>
> But I think a dedicated Wiki would be wonderful. Set
> one up and I'll be there!

By the way, does anyone here know how to get a wiki to look integrated into
an existing websites' css-based theme; i.e., how to 'embed' the wiki into
the pre-existing style framework or, preferably, style sheets?

If this is too OT, I'm happy to hear the answer offline.

-Aaron.

-------------------------------------------------------

The only one I have admin experience with is PmWiki, which is nice because it requires only PHP (no database), and was pretty easy to set up. Since it uses CSS and templates extensively, it shouldn't be too difficult to customize it to match the rest of your site. Look here: http://www.pmwiki.org

- Dave

---
Dave Seidel
[blog] http://superluminal.com/dave/weblog
[music] http://mysterybear.net

Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> > On Monday 28 March 2005 12:05 am, Carl Lumma wrote:
> >>>Talk to me.
>>
>>This has been suggested before. The latest idea seemed
>>to be to get on Wikipedia. About a year ago, I put some
>>effort into cleaning up a few of the pages (which were
>>already) there.
>>
>>But I think a dedicated Wiki would be wonderful. Set
>>one up and I'll be there!
> > > By the way, does anyone here know how to get a wiki to look integrated into
> an existing websites' css-based theme; i.e., how to 'embed' the wiki into
> the pre-existing style framework or, preferably, style sheets?
> > If this is too OT, I'm happy to hear the answer offline.
> > -Aaron.
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > > >

>I literally was thinking of proposing this a couple of days ago.
>Since I have lots of space right now on my site, I'd be willing
>to try a test version, and maybe host the full version as long as
>it doesn't become too large (I have 1 gig total for my two sites).

I think that's a great idea, Aaron.

As Dave said, many WikiEngines support CSS, so you should be able
to get them to look something like your site without much extra
work.

-Carl

A generally positive response. This is good. I get the impression
that it takes a very dedicated community to maintain a wiki due to the
ever-existing threat of spammers. For this reason wikis have a sort
of nerd-culture that goes with them. I'm not sure we're nerdy enough
as a group to make it work (!), though many of us surely are. I just
hope that it won't become the sole work of few; I really would love
even more diversity of opinion than we get on here, a tall order indeed.

Speaking of diversity, the microtonal community is far from
philosophically united, but if we maintain a standard of civility and
address problems in similar ways to wikis that have existed for many
years, I'm optimistic, yea, confidant that we can make something useful.

So, Aaron and monz seem the most capable and willing to host it. I
don't know enough about web servers or whatnot to really do more
research about what's best. But by all means, if either of you has the
time, go for it!

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Krister Johnson
<akjmicro@c...> wrote:
>
> This wiki idea must be in the air or something; I was just thinking
about
> trying out a microtonal wiki on my website.
>
> In fact I think the wiki idea is in general a facinating one.
Someone even
> wrote an basic, but fully functional 11-line wiki app in Python,
winning a
> 'small wiki' contest.
>
> I literally was thinking of proposing this a couple of days ago.
Since I have
> lots of space right now on my site, I'd be willing to try a test
version, and
> maybe host the full version as long as it doesn't become too large
(I have 1
> gig total for my two sites)
>
> --Aaron.
>

hi Jacob,

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jacob" <jbarton@r...> wrote:

> So, Aaron and monz seem the most capable and willing to
> host it. I don't know enough about web servers or whatnot
> to really do more research about what's best. But by all
> means, if either of you has the time, go for it!

i wanted to point out that, while the Tonalsoft Encyclopedia
is certainly my "baby", it is very much a group effort
in that i add material from others in the tuning community
whenever something that i feel is important is posted on
one of the tuning lists.

so while probably more than 90% of it is written by me,
there is a lot of stuff there from John Chalmers and Paul
Erlich, and some from Carl Lumma, Manuel Op de Coul,
Margo Schulter, Jan Haluska, Kraig Grady, et al.

as for me having the time ... what's that? been so long
since i had any that i think i forgot what it is ...

i'm super busy working on the redesign of the Tonalsoft
website (mainly the Encyclopedia right now), and writing
the help files for the software. but we very much want
the Tonalsoft site to be a cyber-center for microtonal
goings-on, and the wiki fits right in.

-monz