Ron Liechty's Forum Nokia Blog
Web 2.0 rev. 8.0d
Nokia Ron | 28 August, 2007 02:42
I never got the purpose of a Wiki until I started using Wikipedia. To me the only thing that Wikis were good for was for collaboration projects. I did not grasp the concept of contributed documentation, only contributed code and comments. Now, a Wikipedia is my first stop for documentation of anything I am curious about. Want to know what SOA is? Then wikipedia.org is the place to go. Now granted there are twenty other possible solutions besides Service Oriented Software but generally from the context of the phrase you are reading it, you will get the right answer.
I hope that Forum Nokia’s Wiki can be the place for all mobile device developers to go to first for answers. I hope that when a person predominately doing Samsung device applications wants to find out information that they check the Nokia Wiki first. I say this because then that that same person will contribute his knowledge to Nokia’s developers Wiki. Sure we could all just use Google and let the Google Brats rake in the dough but do we want another mega-corporation dominating the world? (Well, yeah, if it is Nokia).
The best way to learn something is to teach it, the next best way is to write an article about it. If you don’t have time to do those, read a Wiki. If it is wrong, don’t worry an expert will come by and correct it in short order. I don’t comprehend why I resisted Wikis for years, most likely is that I just had this concept of it as a project tracking system. Whatever held me back, like a dam breaking my enthusiasm is bursting out. So, watch out below.
Ron
Business Opportunities/Services, Enterprise, Entertainment |
Next | 
Previous |
Comments (3) | 
Trackbacks (0)
Comments
Re: Web 2.0 rev. 8.0d
Nokia Ron | 28/08/2007, 20:00
Ah yes, there will always be incorrect misleading and poorly written articles it is unavoidable when you have people from every stratus of development from beginners to veteran experts. Also some are not written in a native language which can make them sound poorly written. The good thing is that for an expert it is much simpler to correct a poorly written article than it is to create a new one.Ron
Re: Web 2.0 rev. 8.0d
antonypr | 29/08/2007, 04:25
Correct. From what I've seen so far; there are some people who write articles without searching first whether the same article has been written or not. This leads to duplicated contents. Sometimes, it's a challenge to "merge" them.
Re: Web 2.0 rev. 8.0d
antonypr | 28/08/2007, 19:35
The only thing that keeps bothering me is the quality of the contents. Some articles are written poorly.