Glossary - add new term

access denied

anyway i am not lucky that all the effort (speaking about some serious > 100 hours here) i spent on vvvviki2.0’s glossary is more-or-less lost within the transfer to vvvveb3.0.

if at least it would be possible to have kind of a “read-only-access-in-edit-mode” on i could imagine that it would be more easy to copypaste the wikisourcecode to new pages here.
i am willing to port all this but all links and formatting get lost:
then you know what i mean…

pls no offense to vvvvebmaster: you did a great job and i understand the complexity of your tasks. :)

the glossary is a great idea so we integrated it to the new site as its own feature. a glossary item can now be defined like this:
on the glossary page. all those items can then be referenced in any wiki/forum context like so:
DualView resulting in the term being displayed like:
hovering a glossary term (denoted by the ?) you get its description in the tooltip. clicking it you follow the link which is supposed to lead to a site where this term is explained in a broader context. also see about-the-glossary.

while migrating the sites and putting them in a (hopefully) better structure it became obvious that a lot of content was doubled on the old wiki and thus not maintainable like this. so we took the liberty to summarize and restructure a bit without getting rid of any of the valuable information. mistakes may have happened, if you’re missing something in specific please point it out.

needless to say Kalle (VVVV) your work is highly appreciated as always.

creating glossary item works now. sorry for the inconvenience.

@kalle: no offense taken. not only your work but also your feedback is always appreciated.

more thoughts about the glossary

the glossary is way to hidden.

it should at least appear as an object in the submenu of documentation.
furthermore i think it should be accessable from much more places.

the glossary is not helpful at all like it is now.

nice that i can add terms to the glossary.
but editing is not possible. (or i just don’t know how to?!?)

i agree that each term in the glossary should have maximal a single-sentence explanation of the related object. or even less.
in my opinion the glossary should be
*just a list of all the vvvvocabulary.
*a jumplist to several small wikipages explaining only the related term.

when answering questions in the forums i just want to be able to put a term into double brackets to refer to a wikipage containing the related “microcontent”.
which of both links is more helpful for a newbie:

also IMHO maintenance of the complete documentation would be much more easy making more use of the INCLUDE-feature.

what is of spreads and slices supposed to mean?
shouldn’t it be about spreads and slices?

furthermore I’d like to be able to edit in readmode only!
this way i could copy/paste formattings/image links etc. which would make it much more easy for me to port valuable content.

documentation submenu is an option. i think the glossary-page itself doesn’t need to be even more accessible as one would rather not look at the glossary but only use it by hovering items of the glossary, getting a tooltip and jumping to the explanation in the documentation. as you’d also not actually read the telefonbuch but rather jump to specific entries.

aight, editing seems not possible for registered users. vvvvebmaster to the rescue please.

i don’t understand though, why you created additional wikipages for NIL and O since with NIL and Ø and Empty Spread you already jump to the same page.

which is exactly what it is right now, right?

this is probably where we disagree. one of the great features of html is that you can jump to anchors inside a page directly like e.g. with Slice. i’d argue it is great to be referred to a page that covers the bigger picture as well as the topic in question allowing the reader to immediately see whats important around his current topic of interest.

the second one. the only difference is it offers an additional tooltip.

it is just me trying to sound funny referring to Of_Mice_and_Men (which i haven’t even read). to the native english ones: how does it sound?

jain…if we’d start from scratch with the documentation and a supamasta plan then probably yes. as for now it is grown like it is i much think that being able to refer to specific anchors of a page with glossary-terms is not so bad.

Good morning guys,

glossary items can now be edited by regular users. We still had a wrong acl setting there.