Oolite Wiki

[Cholmondely]

I just had my extractor running again to see what was happening there - and I can see that the BlOomberg markets are marked with a wiki page while I know this was not the case in the past. So I guess it is not a question of 'why' or 'what' but rather 'when'.
It is unavoidable that these pages refer to a specific time. Therefore the pages meanwhile show the creation date in the upper right, and I am publishing updated versions every now and then.

Revision history of "BlOomberg Markets"

(cur | prev) 23:16, 24 September 2019‎ Phkb (talk | contribs)‎ . . (3,273 bytes) (-6)‎ . . (→‎Overview)
(cur | prev) 23:15, 24 September 2019‎ Phkb (talk | contribs)‎ . . (3,279 bytes) (-5)‎ . . (→‎Changelog)
[...]

My above statement is incorrect. At that time another change impacted that all pages were marked as found.
I will investigate to find a better reason/result.

Does it really matter? At the moment I'm the only person doing much, and I use your Index on the wiki to determine if a page is up or not, not the updated versions. The most recent of those I use to determine what goes on the page.

[phkb]

Does it really matter?

I can see this being a really handy tool, for both players and developers. A common question on the boards is, “Why am I getting this message in my log file about this ship_id/equipment_id?” It can then be a long and painful process to narrow down the list of potential OXP’s to find the one with the required ID. Using this extraction, in would take mere seconds to find the answer.

Aside from fixing the issue with the wiki reference, it would be great to have the three lists sorted alphabetically, even if that mixed OXP entries up a bit. Much easier to find what you’re looking for.

In any case, hiran, keep up the good work! Looking forward to the completed version.

[hiran]

My above statement is incorrect. At that time another change impacted that all pages were marked as found.
I will investigate to find a better reason/result.

Does it really matter? At the moment I'm the only person doing much, and I use your Index on the wiki to determine if a page is up or not, not the updated versions. The most recent of those I use to determine what goes on the page.

Well, to some degree it does. Even if I cannot make the indexes to be exactly the same it is worth finding out where the discrepancy is coming from to create transparency. But your work is not impacted.

And I think I found something, but verification is pending...

[hiran]

I just had my extractor running again to see what was happening there - and I can see that the BlOomberg markets are marked with a wiki page while I know this was not the case in the past. So I guess it is not a question of 'why' or 'what' but rather 'when'.
It is unavoidable that these pages refer to a specific time. Therefore the pages meanwhile show the creation date in the upper right, and I am publishing updated versions every now and then.

Revision history of "BlOomberg Markets"

(cur | prev) 23:16, 24 September 2019‎ Phkb (talk | contribs)‎ . . (3,273 bytes) (-6)‎ . . (→‎Overview)
(cur | prev) 23:15, 24 September 2019‎ Phkb (talk | contribs)‎ . . (3,279 bytes) (-5)‎ . . (→‎Changelog)
[...]

At that time the change of adding XML parsing impacted that all pages were marked as found.
Meanwhile that code works satisfactory, and I had a closer look at the Wiki page checks.

The HTTP client code I used did not emit more status so I guess it would have only found pages that directly match the constructed URL.
For better control I switched to another client that will give better feedback and automatically can follow redirections from the server. All of a sudden a lot more pages are found now, and for the others a reason is given in the list of warnings.

The latest version is now available at https://app.box.com/s/t9l1k9n5lioq24nc29009gbx3f57w1q9

[Cholmondely]

I just had my extractor running again to see what was happening there - and I can see that the BlOomberg markets are marked with a wiki page while I know this was not the case in the past. So I guess it is not a question of 'why' or 'what' but rather 'when'.
It is unavoidable that these pages refer to a specific time. Therefore the pages meanwhile show the creation date in the upper right, and I am publishing updated versions every now and then.

Revision history of "BlOomberg Markets"

(cur | prev) 23:16, 24 September 2019‎ Phkb (talk | contribs)‎ . . (3,273 bytes) (-6)‎ . . (→‎Overview)
(cur | prev) 23:15, 24 September 2019‎ Phkb (talk | contribs)‎ . . (3,279 bytes) (-5)‎ . . (→‎Changelog)
[...]

At that time the change of adding XML parsing impacted that all pages were marked as found.
Meanwhile that code works satisfactory, and I had a closer look at the Wiki page checks.

The HTTP client code I used did not emit more status so I guess it would have only found pages that directly match the constructed URL.
For better control I switched to another client that will give better feedback and automatically can follow redirections from the server. All of a sudden a lot more pages are found now, and for the others a reason is given in the list of warnings.

The latest version is now available at https://app.box.com/s/t9l1k9n5lioq24nc29009gbx3f57w1q9

Hiran, I presume that all this does not impact on what I'm up to (I don't know what XML parsing is, or HTTP client code, or constructed URLs)!

I'm sticking with the old version 3 which does not have all my additions but does have the basic information which I need to do my "job".

[hiran]

The HTTP client code I used did not emit more status so I guess it would have only found pages that directly match the constructed URL.
For better control I switched to another client that will give better feedback and automatically can follow redirections from the server. All of a sudden a lot more pages are found now, and for the others a reason is given in the list of warnings.

The latest version is now available at https://app.box.com/s/t9l1k9n5lioq24nc29009gbx3f57w1q9

Hiran, I presume that all this does not impact on what I'm up to (I don't know what XML parsing is, or HTTP client code, or constructed URLs)!

I'm sticking with the old version 3 which does not have all my additions but does have the basic information which I need to do my "job".

Sorry for going too technical.

I recommend grabbing an update. The old index was built solely on reading manifest.plist and others using the plist format, and whenever some XML was found parsing would simply not happen. Thus such OXPs show a warning but the index is not complete. The new index I created also spans such OXPs.

BTW, if you want to refer to a specific version, better use the date of generation which is shown on the top right corner.

[Cholmondely]

The HTTP client code I used did not emit more status so I guess it would have only found pages that directly match the constructed URL.
For better control I switched to another client that will give better feedback and automatically can follow redirections from the server. All of a sudden a lot more pages are found now, and for the others a reason is given in the list of warnings.

The latest version is now available at https://app.box.com/s/t9l1k9n5lioq24nc29009gbx3f57w1q9

Hiran, I presume that all this does not impact on what I'm up to (I don't know what XML parsing is, or HTTP client code, or constructed URLs)!

I'm sticking with the old version 3 which does not have all my additions but does have the basic information which I need to do my "job".

Sorry for going too technical.

I recommend grabbing an update. The old index was built solely on reading manifest.plist and others using the plist format, and whenever some XML was found parsing would simply not happen. Thus such OXPs show a warning but the index is not complete. The new index I created also spans such OXPs.

BTW, if you want to refer to a specific version, better use the date of generation which is shown on the top right corner.

Umm, not really knowing what XML parsing is, why does it matter if it happens or not? I'm not actually running these OXPs whether legacy XML, legacy Openstep or "modern" Javascript. I'm merely writing about them! And why such a big fuss about just the XML ones?

[phkb]

And why such a big fuss about just the XML ones?

Probably because it requires a different method of reading (ie parsing). So, to read both XML and OpenStep formats requires two different parsing techniques, doubling the size of the code.

@hiran: The new output is much better. A couple of questions/points, though:
1. In the "Warnings" section of each OXP, there is a warning if an equipment or ship item doesn't have an individual wiki (eg see first OXP "Trident Down"). I'm not sure those count as warnings, and for some OXP's that have lots of equipment items (eg "Ship Configuration") the list of warnings is huge but unnecessary.
2. There are still some OXP's that have "No wiki" when a wiki entry exists. See "Duplex Fuel Tank" or "Target Autolock Plus".
3. Feature request: An additional warning you could add is if there is a difference in the license between the manager's manifest file and the manifest in the expansion itself. For example, see "Auto-prime equipment", where the manager license is "CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0" and the expansion license is "CC-BY-SA 4.0"
4. Feature request: It would nice to have some additional columns in the OXP index list, like category, author and version. For the Equipment and Ships lists, having the originating OXP name as a column next to each entry would also be useful.
5. Please oh please can I get the index lists sorted? Pretty please?

[montana05]

Maybe worth mentioning, we do have several packages including both, XML and OpenStep.

[Cholmondely]

@hiran: The new output is much better. A couple of questions/points, though:
1. In the "Warnings" section of each OXP, there is a warning if an equipment or ship item doesn't have an individual wiki (eg see first OXP "Trident Down"). I'm not sure those count as warnings, and for some OXP's that have lots of equipment items (eg "Ship Configuration") the list of warnings is huge but unnecessary.
2. There are still some OXP's that have "No wiki" when a wiki entry exists. See "Duplex Fuel Tank" or "Target Autolock Plus".
5. Please oh please can I get the index lists sorted? Pretty please?

Just to give fair warning.

I hope to ensure that all OXZs are listed on the Expansions Manager... but:
1) Some may not be tagged as such on our new Hiranistificalite Index because eg the page name may include "OXP".
2) I do not intend to do all of Griff's offerings. He has a nicely designed page which has had a lot of work put into it. I don't understand why there are so many versions of his oxps, and I don't wish to mangle his pages. I have enough trouble trying to work out the differences between the various versions of Cadaceus without diving into the Griffic morass head first.

I also hope to include the more exciting bits of equipment on the wiki (eg Dynamic Response Uridium Injection Dilator‎) as it is vitally crucially important that everybody should have one (our dubious prophet of the lugubrious libatory lobstoids needs thirteen, at the very least).

I think that's it.

I am becoming increasingly concerned about the number of redirect pages on the wiki (all my own fault. I know, I know...). People use it to find things and I would suspect most of us type in the words, which allows the wiki search engine come up with a list of choices, from which the correct item can be chosen. If there are too many choices, this does not work as well. Of course if people cut and paste, then it is a very different matter - but you can't cut and paste from the F3 ship outfitting screen in the game (even Version 1.90). So you will be typing, as above...

I see the important thing as that everything is on our wiki. our new Hiranistificalite Index is an absolutely spiffing tool for managing that. But it is merely a tool. Turning the index page blue is not the same as having everything listed (and findable) on the wiki. Of course, if Phkb waves his glass of cognac and the items on the F3 shipyard suddenly link to the wiki, then we will indeed need to turn the index page blue. But we are not there quite yet!

[hiran]

And why such a big fuss about just the XML ones?

Probably because it requires a different method of reading (ie parsing). So, to read both XML and OpenStep formats requires two different parsing techniques, doubling the size of the code.

That is an excellent (and hopefully nontechnical enough) explanation.
Plus, as I saw it there is some thread trying to get rid of XML plists.

@hiran: The new output is much better. A couple of questions/points, though:
1. In the "Warnings" section of each OXP, there is a warning if an equipment or ship item doesn't have an individual wiki (eg see first OXP "Trident Down"). I'm not sure those count as warnings, and for some OXP's that have lots of equipment items (eg "Ship Configuration") the list of warnings is huge but unnecessary.
2. There are still some OXP's that have "No wiki" when a wiki entry exists. See "Duplex Fuel Tank" or "Target Autolock Plus".
3. Feature request: An additional warning you could add is if there is a difference in the license between the manager's manifest file and the manifest in the expansion itself. For example, see "Auto-prime equipment", where the manager license is "CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0" and the expansion license is "CC-BY-SA 4.0"
4. Feature request: It would nice to have some additional columns in the OXP index list, like category, author and version. For the Equipment and Ships lists, having the originating OXP name as a column next to each entry would also be useful.
5. Please oh please can I get the index lists sorted? Pretty please?

Thank you for the feedback. It is good to discuss and improve the applicability and usability.

1. My original gist was to be able to lookup items I see in the game and want to know more about. If a shipyard offers a "Gabooze Quadronium Messenger" I do not care what OXP it came it or why the page should have a different name - I just want to get more information on that item. This is where the idea came up the Oolite Wiki could contain an area acting as Encyclopaedia. Before I had warnings there were repeated questions as of why a page was found/not found. Having them should now explain the situation so I guess they will stay.

2. I will check what may be happening here.

3. There are more fields that may differ between manifest and manager list. When I encountered that fact I emphasized it by having side-by-side tables. Important discrepancies for sure should get fixed, so I will include your suggestion.

4. On one combined index it is hard to add more columns without exceeding the screen width while keeping a reasonable font size. Future versions will have separate pages for Expansions, Equipment and Ships so this should be doable with little effort.

5. Already implemented - just wait for the new release

[phkb]

If a shipyard offers a "Gabooze Quadronium Messenger" I do not care what OXP it came it or why the page should have a different name - I just want to get more information on that item.

But the lack of a specific wiki page for the equipment item or ship doesn't mean the OXP wiki page doesn't have the info. It might be nice to have individual pages for every equipment item and ship, but there are quite a lot of "invisible" equipment items and ship registrations that are only used by code to handle some specific situation in an OXP. They don't need to be (and really, shouldn't be) broken out into individual wiki pages.

[hiran]

If a shipyard offers a "Gabooze Quadronium Messenger" I do not care what OXP it came it or why the page should have a different name - I just want to get more information on that item.

But the lack of a specific wiki page for the equipment item or ship doesn't mean the OXP wiki page doesn't have the info. It might be nice to have individual pages for every equipment item and ship, but there are quite a lot of "invisible" equipment items and ship registrations that are only used by code to handle some specific situation in an OXP. They don't need to be (and really, shouldn't be) broken out into individual wiki pages.

So Cholmondeley was right to not have the pages created automatically.

Is there a way to identify those that should stay "invisible"?
And while we are at that, is there a way to indentify that some equipment is already documented as part of the OXP?

[hiran]

I am becoming increasingly concerned about the number of redirect pages on the wiki (all my own fault. I know, I know...). People use it to find things and I would suspect most of us type in the words, which allows the wiki search engine come up with a list of choices, from which the correct item can be chosen. If there are too many choices, this does not work as well. Of course if people cut and paste, then it is a very different matter - but you can't cut and paste from the F3 ship outfitting screen in the game (even Version 1.90). So you will be typing, as above...

I see the important thing as that everything is on our wiki. our new Hiranistificalite Index is an absolutely spiffing tool for managing that. But it is merely a tool. Turning the index page blue is not the same as having everything listed (and findable) on the wiki. Of course, if Phkb waves his glass of cognac and the items on the F3 shipyard suddenly link to the wiki, then we will indeed need to turn the index page blue. But we are not there quite yet!

I understand this is becoming an issue. We may need a better solution for that.
While I want everything to have a page, you want the search function to behave wisely. Which means not everything that might exist in the wiki should directly show up when a human being initiates a search.

Now I am wondering whether namespaces could be a solution for that (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Namespaces)...

[Cholmondely]

I am becoming increasingly concerned about the number of redirect pages on the wiki (all my own fault. I know, I know...). People use it to find things and I would suspect most of us type in the words, which allows the wiki search engine come up with a list of choices, from which the correct item can be chosen. If there are too many choices, this does not work as well. Of course if people cut and paste, then it is a very different matter - but you can't cut and paste from the F3 ship outfitting screen in the game (even Version 1.90). So you will be typing, as above...

I see the important thing as that everything is on our wiki. our new Hiranistificalite Index is an absolutely spiffing tool for managing that. But it is merely a tool. Turning the index page blue is not the same as having everything listed (and findable) on the wiki. Of course, if Phkb waves his glass of cognac and the items on the F3 shipyard suddenly link to the wiki, then we will indeed need to turn the index page blue. But we are not there quite yet!

I understand this is becoming an issue. We may need a better solution for that.
While I want everything to have a page, you want the search function to behave wisely. Which means not everything that might exist in the wiki should directly show up when a human being initiates a search.

Now I am wondering whether namespaces could be a solution for that (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Namespaces)...

Ahem... not everything mentioned at Mediawiki seems to work where our wiki is concerned... I've utterly failed to get footnotes to operate, and when I replace one screenshot with a newer one, the old one lingers and refuses my assignment of banishment to oblivion (see http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/SOTL_Altmap and my failed attempts to replace the icons just beneath the "F6 Galaxy screen" title - if you click on the grey image you will see the yellow image which I tried to replace it with ... but it would not do so (at least not on my computer screen!).

And if you spend enough time looking around you will some rather unimpressed comments by such as Treczoks - eg "Dummy templates needed to accommodate ancient MediaWiki"...

I'm not complaining - I'm here to edit text and am not too concerned about exactly which bells and whistles the wiki is missing. I do find the inbuilt search function unhelpful, far too orthographically precise and initially only showing a small handful of pages, but am aware that better external search engines exist (which I'm unable to get to function!).