TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: wiki vs blog From:Tony Chung <tonyc -at- tonychung -dot- ca> To:TECHWR-L Writing <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:46:27 -0800
Wow. What a heated debate. I second Bill's original post (before
John's clarification of his original question) that the tool shouldn't
matter, because wikis and blogs differ only conceptually. If I can
abstract this concept into another realm that I'm familiar with, music
notation...
While learning how to notate rhythmic patters, I was taught that it is
at least mathematically possible to transcribe a pattern in any time
signature, using any note value as a base. However, the distinguishing
marker is that the time signature isn't purely mathematical, but also
implies an accent pattern of strong and weak beats, called the
"pulse". So, while you could notate a 6 -8 pattern in 2-4, and be
accurate to the bar, there may be marked differences in the way a
musician would play the 6-8 versus the 2-4.
However, my analogy falls short when we consider that both blogging
software and wiki software are purely interpreted code that can do
virtually anything you want it to. The developer has far more control
over extending the application than a music transcriber. In some ways,
the developer is more like the musician who can choose to disregard
the entire pulse framework implied by the time signature, and instead
opt to play the math with a completely different pulse.
How many of us have chosen to use either an excel spreadsheet or a
word document to create forms, based on the type of information
stored, and the particular requirements for validation and receiving
data?
With regards to specific blog vs. wiki discussions, I can tell you
that WP by far offers the best implementation of the TinyMCE WYSIWYG
editor on the planet. I've tried it with TWiki, turned it on (and
promptly off again) in ExpressionEngine, and haven't yet explored
Drupal or MediaWiki implementations. The difference I think is that WP
saves text and HTML-as-text, whereas wiki software applies its own
markup layer to abstract the user from the source HTML.
In this way, sometimes the wiki markup syntax is more accurate, and
appropriate for the documentation's need for structure.
So, back to the circle we go.
-Tony
--
Tony Chung: Creative Communications
Cell: +1-604-710-5164
Email: tonyc -at- tonychung -dot- ca * Web: http://tonychung.ca
Skype: tonychung.ca * GTalk/MSN: tonychung -dot- ca -at- gmail -dot- com
Twitter: @techcom * Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/tonychung.ca
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you looking for one documentation tool that does it all? Author,
build, test, and publish your Help files with just one easy-to-use tool.
Try the latest Doc-To-Help 2009 v3 risk-free for 30-days at: http://www.doctohelp.com/
Explore CAREER options and paths related to Technical Writing,
learn to create SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS documents, and
get tips on FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION best practices. Free at: http://www.ModernAnalyst.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
