Post/Author/DateTime	Post
pilias_simber 11-01-05, 11:49 AM	As several people have mentioned in the past there is a definate need as a good resource for Eberron for there to be a Wiki for the Ask Keith Baker thread. As far as I know no one has yet done this, I have decided that I will do this as I've never made a Wiki before but might as well learn. To my knowledge there currently is not a Wiki in existance, if there is I would appreciate someone letting me know about it. Anyone interested in helping me is welcome to send emails to Piliassimber@hotmail.com I was thinking of using www.AskKeithBaker.com if it hasn't been taken.
garner_adam 11-01-05, 01:03 PM	I support this idea. Who knows? Maybe I'll even help! =)
ekomega 11-01-05, 01:42 PM	I hate the supposed word "wiki" and believe it should be struck from use. WTF is a wiki? I vote that this collection and organization of Keith Baker material not having anything to do with that stupid, made up, not actually a word.
drunkenewok 11-01-05, 01:47 PM	As an FYI, I've got something like this in-progress. WizO Paradox put out a call about a month ago for sorting the AKB thread into categories and providing it for download from the WotC site. There were three or four volunteers, but so far as I know, I'm the only one really working on it, and life-issues have kept me from getting it done as fast as I'd like. I'm currently about half-way through the AKB-FAQ thread (somewhere around Jan 2005), and have sorted the questions by a sizable selection of hierarchical categories. It's currently in an Excel spreadsheet, and has just over 2000 questions. I've also written a script that will store it in a MySQL database so we can run more detailed queries and sort the info better. I was planning to put a rough beta on my website when I get a better interface put together. Given a little time, it wouldn't be hard to re-write the script to spit out my work-to-date into a Wiki, and I can even setup the necessary software on my site without too much hassle (though my current webhost probably can't handle too much traffic as is). The big question is whether or not WotC will allow this, given their control of the Intellectual Property rights of the setting. A Wiki would be a better format for information like this, primarily because it allows a lot of collaboration between the various editors, and isn't limited to the time/creativity of a single editor. If this gets off the ground, I'm more than willing to continue working on the project in whatever role is necessary.
drunkenewok 11-01-05, 01:56 PM	I hate the supposed word "wiki" and believe it should be struck from use. WTF is a wiki?It's just as much a valid word as "email", (which didn't exist 30 years ago and is the hybrid of electronic mail) or "quark" (which didn't exist 100 years ago and was derived from a poem by James Joyce). Linguistic purity aside, it's also in the dictionary (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=wiki) and the encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki). If you'd really prefer "collaborative website", feel free to do the mental substitution.
pilias_simber 11-01-05, 02:02 PM	I hate the supposed word "wiki" and believe it should be struck from use. WTF is a wiki? I vote that this collection and organization of Keith Baker material not having anything to do with that stupid, made up, not actually a word. I believe that a Wiki is the best form we could use for this type of resource because everyone can contribute to it, it would be easily searchable (my intention is to make it so one could type in a word, Silver Flame for example, and anytime a question or answer mentions Silver Flame a result would turn up in the search), and the biggest reason of all, because the Ask Keith Baker thread is always changing, having a static file on the Wizards site would quickly become outdated whereas anyone who wanted to take the time in a Wiki could update it, meaning it would be updated quicker and be a better resource for the community. Though the material is WotC's intellectual property I would hope that they would view it like any other fan site and allow it, especially as I intend to link back to Wizard's sites. Also since apparently there is work already being done in this way maybe if I get the basic framework in place people could put up what's already been done. I was imagining having a seperate entry for every question/answer in the thread, maybe putting the Question up as the title to the page and then put the answer as the text, what do people think of this?
pilias_simber 11-01-05, 02:05 PM	just for everyone's information: Copied from Dictionary.com Main Entry: wiki Part of Speech: noun Definition: a collaborative Web site set up to allow user editing and adding of content Etymology: 1995; < Hawaiian wiki wiki quick Usage: sometimes cap.
Tek 11-01-05, 03:32 PM	I think a wiki would be a great idea aswell. I'd help out.
drunkenewok 11-01-05, 03:33 PM	You'll get no arguments from me that a Wiki would be a much better resource than any static file would be. It would probably require some level of editorial control given that if two different people add the same question, you'll have to sort out which one to keep. There is also the advantage that you can easily link to other articles within the wiki that have supplemental information on a given topic. Though the material is WotC's intellectual property I would hope that they would view it like any other fan site and allow it, especially as I intend to link back to Wizard's sites.Hoping is nice, but I'd rather get at least some approval before committing massive public copyright infringement. Also since apparently there is work already being done in this way maybe if I get the basic framework in place people could put up what's already been done.That works for me. Unless prices have skyrocketed since I last shopped, you should be able to get everything we'd need for less than $10/month, and might find an even better deal if you hunt hard enough. The necessary framework would include: Webhost (I prefer Apache/MySQL/PHP, but anything with a database and at least one scripting language will do in a pinch) Domain name (sounds like you've got that covered) Wiki software that is supported by the chosen webhost (I'm partial to MediaWiki, but that's just cause it's the only one I've actually used, rather than a major evaluation of the various options) It would be nice to have shell (telnet/ssh) access, but it's not critical, and I'd either have to have FTP access to the webhost or email you the necessary files/scripts to upload my work and have you FTP it in As for site layout and formatting, it'll probably grow and evolve over time, but I think one question per wiki-page is probably good. We can also put links to new questions/answers on the homepage, as well as links to the various categories I've put together. Search may be helpful, but not terribly so unless you have a fair number of keywords. Even now (only 50% done), I have 30+ questions in the "Silver Flame" category (there are even more questions that just mention the Silver Flame in passing), and over 200 in the "Warforged" category (though I'm planning to break the latter up into more sub-categories in the near future).
pilias_simber 11-01-05, 04:56 PM	you wouldn't happen to know who I would need to contact to get permission to go ahead with this would you?
Tek 11-01-05, 06:20 PM	Start with maybe WizO_Paradox.
anarco_rata 11-01-05, 06:39 PM	And keith, before using his name as a domain name, ask him if it's ok, it's not a legal matter, is just showing a little respect, i think. I do like the idea and could probably help a little too
ORC_Paradox 11-01-05, 08:31 PM	I've already got a group of volunteers who are putting together all the questions and answers in one document that will be downloadable as a PDF on the site.
pilias_simber 11-02-05, 04:41 AM	As I've already stated though a downloadable PDF will not be as good a resource as a Wiki would be. Is there anyway I could get permission to put up a Wiki for this information? I think it would get the resource out there to the community faster and remain a more valuable resource for a longer period of time with less investment of Wizard's resources.
polt 11-02-05, 05:55 AM	I agree, a Wiki would be a lot more useful.
MysticTheurge 11-02-05, 08:37 AM	Agreed, the simple fact that a Wiki would be update-able makes it an infinitely more appealing option than a simple downloadable PDF. Dox, what's the possibility that a wiki like this could be hosted on the Wizards site, and take the place of a PDF?
drunkenewok 11-02-05, 10:50 AM	I've already got a group of volunteers who are putting together all the questions and answers in one document that will be downloadable as a PDF on the site.As stated above, I'm one of the volunteers. Either the other three volunteers are working independently from me, or they've lost interest. I'm about 50% through the AKB-FAQ, and have done the following: Broken up multi-question posts so each individual question can be appropriately sorted and categorized Created a hierarchical category structure with 23 major categories and almost 300 total categories with a targetted maximum number of questions per category around 50. Categories with more than 50 questions will be broken up into smaller categoriesI agree with the other posters that so long as the AKB thread is active, a Wiki will be a far more useful resource than a static PDF. The PDF would require regular updates (probably monthly), and would likely require a volunteer(s) or Wizards staff member to perform them. While I'm willing to be the volunteer in question for the near future, it's possible (however unlikely) that my interest in Eberron or the quantity of my free time will wane. After setting up the Wiki, it would take a mimimum amount of editorial effort (which could be exercised by the community at large, rather than one or two appointed individuals) to maintain and update the site. If the issue is the lack of technical expertise, I'll happily offer my services, and I'll attest that setting up a Wiki on a web-server that already has Apache/PHP/MySQL (which the Wizards site does have) is relatively simple and straitforward. The hardest part would be tweaking the graphics and integrating it into the existing site structure. Hosting on the Wizards site would be the easiest way to retain control of the system and prevent any potential copyright confusion. Other options include hosting it on Keith Baker's website (http://www.bossythecow.com/), or setting up a totally different fan-site. Both of these options bring up the question of copyright infringement, though if substantial copyright disclaimers are included (and it's relatively easy to include on every page of the wiki) and links to the Wizards site are provided, that might be sufficient. I've also considered writing a Web Application in PHP/MySQL that would specifically cater to handling the FAQ, and could supplant using the message boards as the primary source, and would eliminate the need for any outside editorial control. If none of the above are an option, I could repackage my existing work into a message board thread sorted by category without too much difficulty. It would require ongoing editorial maintenance, but updates would tend to be easier to distribute than using a static PDF. So to break down the options available: Wiki hosted on the Wizards.com site (or a different site) Pros: Doesn't require an editor, Uses off-the-shelf free software, maximum possible utility given time and sufficient community interest Cons: Requires setup, WotC approval, and integrating into the existing Wizards.com website may be difficult Custom FAQ web application hosted on the Wizards.com site (or a different site) Pros: Doesn't require an editor Cons: Requires setup and WotC approval, Programming time to create, Won't have the same level of cross-linking that a Wiki would allow A categorized message board thread Pros: Requires no extra software, Doesn't require WotC approval (since the AKB-FAQ already exists, it can't hurt to resort it in a more user-friendly way), Allows for more frequent updates than a PDF Cons: Does require an editor, May be difficult-impossible to hand-off if the primary editor quits, Won't be searchable outside the chosen categories unless the Boards search is fixed A downloadable PDF Pros: Already approved by WotC, Would allow limited searching Cons: Requires an editor, Limited release schedule requiring a multi-step/multi-user workflow, Can't be as cross-linked as a Wiki
3nigma 11-02-05, 11:55 AM	I'm in class, so I couldn't read the WHOLE thread, but... I had this exact idea. But I was thinking we need an Eberron Encyclopedia, where any DM (or player, I guess) could reference timlines, locations, NPCs, etc. -3nigma
drunkenewok 11-02-05, 01:19 PM	I had this exact idea. But I was thinking we need an Eberron Encyclopedia, where any DM (or player, I guess) could reference timlines, locations, NPCs, etc.While I agree such a resource would be a wonderful addition, I don't think it will ever materialize for copyright reasons. If WotC were to allow something like that to exist, it would totally cannibalize the sales of Eberron books, which makes no business sense whatsoever. Even if the resource had no "crunch" material (and only included setting and background info), it would still result in a (probably dramatic) drop in sales revenue. Even allowing a resource like the AKB-Wiki is treading on unsure ground, because it too could result in lost sales, albeit to a lesser extent. Given that all the AKB information is already available for free (on the boards), it's more a question of whether the added utility and accessibility of the information in Wiki form is sufficient to significantly cannibalize book sales. There is also a counter-argument that the ease of access to significant amounts of information about the setting might actually increase sales, in which case WotC probably should offer something. Basically, while having the Eberron Wiki (or just an AKB Wiki) is a perfect idea from a player/consumer standpoint, it's a lot trickier when you actually have to ensure continuing revenue as the supplier of Eberron material.
Jonathan Drain 11-02-05, 01:37 PM	In my opinion as a web developer who's very familiar with wikis and content management systems in general, a wiki is not the best thing for an Ask Keith Baker archive. A wiki is good collaborative writing - for when you need to let multiple people both add new things and edit what's been written. An AKB archive would be the writings of one person (Keith Baker) and would not require collaborative editing later. I would solve this problem by writing a clever Perl script which takes the thread webpage and copies out the contents of each of Hellcow's posts to a separate page. This would eliminate most of the gruntwork. After that, it it simply a matter of constructing an index page which links to all of these and sorts them into categories, much like any "FAQ" website you'll see on the internet. I would much recommend that this be in the form of a website rather than a PDF, although converting a website to PDF isn't especially difficult. One reason why a website is good for this is that it's easy to make an index whereby you can just click on topics. Another is that Ask Keith Baker is more the kind of thing you're used to reading on a monitor anyway, and it's not the kind of thing you want to print out and keep for reference - PDF is primarily for the kind of thing that's intended for print. The Ask Keith Baker thread is also frequently updated, so again, this suits a website over a PDF as the archive's primary form. Since the Ask Keith Baker threads are unofficial, there's basically no way I would expect Wizards.com to host the resulting webpage. However, since it's all text and no images, the bandwidth usage should be somewhat reasonable for whoever hosts it. Keith could host it, I could host it, or someone else here could host it.
drunkenewok 11-02-05, 04:01 PM	I would solve this problem by writing a clever Perl script which takes the thread webpage and copies out the contents of each of Hellcow's posts to a separate page. This would eliminate most of the gruntwork.Having contemplated just that course of action, I can only say that either you're a far better programmer than I, or you've underestimated the difficulty involved in parsing the thread into its component parts. Just trying to break it down by question and answer is difficult when I'm personally reading the results, and IME, it's darn hard to teach a script to understand English, especially to the degree where the script can distinguish between two different writers. As it is, the script you suggest would effectively duplicate the AKB-FAQ, which is what I've been working from. Also, while a wiki may not be the most logical choice of software for this application, it would serve the purpose and eliminate the need for a managing editor using only off-the-shelf software. I've already got the rudiments of a script that will generate the webpage(s) you're suggesting from the human-parsed data I've finished, though it still doesn't have the ability to eliminate the need for some sort of managerial control. Unless you know how to write a script that will parse the AKB thread nightly, break each Q&A down by category and write it to a database (from which another script can generate the webpage), the system will require some sort of human interaction to maintain. The chief advantage of the Wiki format is that every user can edit and link-ify the questions in parallel, something that cannot be said for any other format. Being able to turn 3000+ people loose on cleaning up the spelling/grammar mistakes, improving the coherence of questions, sorting and categorizing the posts to maximize new users' chance of finding the information they want, and providing links to related information is just not possible under any other format we choose to release.I would much recommend that this be in the form of a website rather than a PDF, although converting a website to PDF isn't especially difficult. One reason why a website is good for this is that it's easy to make an index whereby you can just click on topics.Though I'm not a fan of the PDF format unless you plan to print the results, a PDF can be indexed and categorized just as easily as a webpage. (Though I'll admit I know how to build an index for a webpage, and would have to research how to index a PDF, so it might not be as easy, but it's still possible). Another potentially useful format would be a downloadable "website" that would allow reading the Q&A on a computer that isn't connected to the internet.Since the Ask Keith Baker threads are unofficial, there's basically no way I would expect Wizards.com to host the resulting webpage.Well, WotC is already "hosting" the AKB threads via the message boards. It's not too much of a stretch to have them host a more user-friendly version of it. If they don't want to host it, but will allow someone else to do so, we shouldn't have any problems. I can even have the quick-and-dirty version of what I've finished so far up and online within 24 hours.
Kotiniemi 11-03-05, 01:31 AM	Finally had the time to post here.. :) I think the idea is great, depending on how it's created, I might be willing/have the time to contribute. Personally I'm about to start an Eberron/D&D site anyways so I've no objections in helping on some other site instead of trying to cover everything. I think using Keith's name in a domain name is an absolutely horrible idea, I for one would react to someone creating and managing a site in my name and with the possibility that a visitor would misunderstand that the site was mine. While Wiki definitely has it's good sides, I'm also inclined that a with a proper index, standard issue Cms would be better. I've no experience whether standard pages and wiki could be conbined without hassles, that would IMHO, be the most suitable solution if it can be done. Kindest regards, Niko
PsionicMonk 11-03-05, 05:05 AM	I think as long as you limit the wiki to just AKB then there shouldn't be any copyright issues. It would be just managing the infomation that people would put up there that isn't in AKB. I'm a strong supporter of this, I'm Psionicmonk :rant:
ORC_Paradox 11-03-05, 05:22 AM	Just a guess, but I think there may be legal issues that wouldn't allow it. For example, folks are NOT allowed to compile and distribute the Dragonshard articles.
Jonathan Drain 11-03-05, 09:23 AM	Having contemplated just that course of action, I can only say that either you're a far better programmer than I, or you've underestimated the difficulty involved in parsing the thread into its component parts. Both are possible, but I'm hoping the former :) As it is, the script you suggest would effectively duplicate the AKB-FAQ, which is what I've been working from. If we already have that FAQ, what's the difference between it and the archive you're suggesting? Indexing? Just a guess, but I think there may be legal issues that wouldn't allow it. For example, folks are NOT allowed to compile and distribute the Dragonshard articles. The dragonshards, yes, but Ask Keith Baker isn't official Wizards of the Coast content, so you'd only need his permission. However, since Wizards owns the Eberron setting along with all its names, then you would need permission, or at least informal permission. On the other hand, they might turn a blind eye to it in the same manner as they do to most D&D fansites.
Jonathan Drain 11-03-05, 09:54 AM	Uh-oh. I've hit a snag. Here is my secret weapon for having a computer program instantly read in the thread. Each thread has a "Download This Thread" link which lets you download the entire thread as a text document. Each post is delimited by a horizontal line, each post is numbered and listed with its author. The question is contained within QUOTE tags, and everything after that is Keith's reply. This is relatively simple for a computer program to interpret and load into a database, from where we can do all kinds of awesome things. The snag is that previous to about post 1500 in the original AKB thread, Keith's QUOTE tags don't function correctly. This makes it much more difficult to interpret the threads prior to this point.
MarkB 11-03-05, 11:08 AM	Uh-oh. I've hit a snag. Here is my secret weapon for having a computer program instantly read in the thread. Each thread has a "Download This Thread" link which lets you download the entire thread as a text document. Each post is delimited by a horizontal line, each post is numbered and listed with its author. The question is contained within QUOTE tags, and everything after that is Keith's reply. This is relatively simple for a computer program to interpret and load into a database, from where we can do all kinds of awesome things. The snag is that previous to about post 1500 in the original AKB thread, Keith's QUOTE tags don't function correctly. This makes it much more difficult to interpret the threads prior to this point. From memory, that's about the time the boards went through a look-and-feel update, so it's probably related to that. You may have to tackle those first 1500 manually or semi-manually.
drunkenewok 11-03-05, 11:24 AM	If we already have that FAQ, what's the difference between it and the archive you're suggesting? Indexing?As I stated above, I've got the existing questions broken down by poster, separated into individual questions (so if Joe-Bob Smith asks 15 questions, none of which are related to each other, they are broken into 15 separate question entries) and categorized. So far I've just been adding categories based on what questions come up, so if there are more than a few questions in the same general vein, I add a category.The snag is that previous to about post 1500 in the original AKB thread, Keith's QUOTE tags don't function correctly. This makes it much more difficult to interpret the threads prior to this point.Well... considering I'm already finished with the entire original AKB thread (parsing and categorizing), you could just parse out the new ones, and we can combine the resulting data. We'd still have to categorize everything (which is what tends to take the most time), and we might have to cut out at least some of it, but it would save a little time. EDIT: Now that I look at the later threads, they would be much easier to parse. I just looked at the start of the original thread and decided I'd have to hand-parse everything. Silly me. :)
ENHenry 11-03-05, 11:50 AM	Keith's gotta feel both special and a little creeped out when people are dissecting and cataloging his every written word like some medieval holy man. :D
Siran Dunmorgan 11-03-05, 02:07 PM	The fellow who used to run dragonshard.net had to give up on the site a couple of weeks ago, but he still has the domain name registered; you might want to contact him and see if he'll let you use the domain name. Work quickly, though: the registration expires in less than two weeks! The administrative contact for dragonshard.net is: Robert Gary, rgary@ccxxi.com —Siran Dunmorgan