Do we need the LDraw Wiki?

[Magnus Forsberg]

Do we need the LDraw Wiki?


1.)
There is a whole section with LUT-parts.
Do we realy need these compilation of pages, when the extraction from LDD is possible, and are becomming common?

2.)
There's an obsolete page with info about ldconfig.ldr.
It needs an update, or must be removed. It's only causing confusion.
The only correct page is here. Or am I wrong?
(b.t.w. are these two pages both correct? article 93 and article 547).

3.)
Do this discussion belong here in the forum instead?
We need a place to collect facts about our standards, and routines, but the discussion should be moved here.

[Orion Pobursky]

Do we need the LDraw Wiki?

The short answer is yes.

The longer answer is that although it has stagnated recently (due to technical problems that I just discover), we do plan to use it extensively in the new version of the website. In addition, we have been using it as a scratchpad for collaborative editing since the wiki format is really conducive to this.

1.)
There is a whole section with LUT-parts.
Do we really need these compilation of pages, when the extraction from LDD is possible, and are becomming common?

Actually, all those are from Lego Universe, not LDD. Additionally, it's a reasonably easy to edit area to track was has been added to the PT and what hasn't.

2.)
There's an obsolete page with info about ldconfig.ldr.
It needs an update, or must be removed. It's only causing confusion.
The only correct page is here. Or am I wrong?
(b.t.w. are these two pages both correct? article 93 and article 547).

See scratchpad explanation above. I do admit that we need to have some sort of tag to denote this.

Also, as far as duplicate URLs are concerned, don't worry about it too much since the new site will be live probably in a few months at the latest.

3.)
Do this discussion belong here in the forum instead?
We need a place to collect facts about our standards, and routines, but the discussion should be moved here.

Probably but that article existed before the forums so I don't blame the author for discussing it there.

[Tim Gould]

2.)
There's an obsolete page with info about ldconfig.ldr.
It needs an update, or must be removed. It's only causing confusion.
The only correct page is here. Or am I wrong?
(b.t.w. are these two pages both correct? article 93 and article 547).

This highlights why we do need it, or at least its chief benefit. Rather than relying on the three webmasters to edit things (who may be busy or whatever) when you spot a mistake you can fix it yourself. A much better system for articles that evolve with time.

Tim

[Orion Pobursky]

Tim makes a good point here. This is why we've decided to have the static content on the website and move the stuff that will evolve over time and software releases to the wiki.