This is an open source contributor project for Wikidata's Chronic Pain project.
I would like to create a webpage that :
Have inputboxes where the user select several wikipedia page titles (with suggestions)
Can also take these parameters via the URL
Get items metadata from Wikidata.
Makes a SPARQL request to gather scholarly articles.
Render data from Wikidata and Wikipedia, linking to various wiki pages.
The webpage will be hosted on Wikimedia fundation server. I have access to a linux container as well as a Jupyter Notebook (not sure this one is suitable for this project). It has to be coded in Python 3 since I will use Pywikibot framework to interact with Wikidata.
I'm new to programming so that I don't really know what is the best approach. I heard that it was difficult to code webpages in Python without using a framework like Django. However this page is very simple so that it may not be the most efficient to deploy Django for this ?
NB : your question is bordering on "primarily opinion based" (which doesn't mean it's a bad question by itself but that answers might be more, well, opinions than hard facts).
This being said, "a single interactive page" doesn't mean the server code behind is just loading a static html file and sending it to the client. For example, the main UI part of our product is, technically speaking, "a single interactive page", but this "single" page is full react app and is backed by a dedicated API with a dozen entry points, which the dispatch to a whole load of backend code including database access, celery tasks etc. It would of course be technically possible to code all this with only pure wsgi or even plain old cgi code, but well, it could also be possible to write it directly in C or even assembly and no one would ever consider this a viable solution.
To make a long story short: do not even waste your time trying to code this project with plain wsgi (and let's not talk cgi), you will end up reinventing the squared wheel and everyone will hate you for this (stakeholders because you'll never deliver a robust, working product in due time and budget, and other devs because they'll now have to port the whole darn thing to a stable, mature and maintained framework). Now if Django appears to be overkill for this project there are much lighter frameworks like flask. Actually both are the "industry standard" and safe choices.
Office 2016 was released with a very specific search box on the ribbon shown below (image from Microsoft blog). After a little research (took me a bloody while to even get the search terms right for google) I found that it uses intuitive language to find the commands fast. I wanted to implement something similar if not the same with my application.
Excel Ribbon "Tell Me"
I wanted to know how do I proceed to implement this. I understand there is a steep learning curve but I am looking for a place to start. Hopefully some examples, some libraries if there is something or some algorithms I may need to learn.
It was very difficult finding out what technology is used. I found another blog explaining the new features with perhaps a little extra information rather than just mentioning what it is. "Tell Me uses a technique called word-wheeling, which enables it to start showing results as soon as you start typing. With every keystroke, the results are modified and refined."
Read so far:
blogs.office.com/2014/05/15/get-more-done-with-tell-me
blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ukfe/2014/06/03/office-365-productivity-feature-get-more-done-with-tell-me/
So any help for me to start trying to implement this feature is appreciated. Just as a note I use C++ (Qt) but I guess to learn I wouldn't mind any language.
There is some libraries that lets you run C++. So, it is it possible to run a game that uses directx full mode screen?
Google is developing a tool to allow this kind of thing via Chrome. It is called Chrome Native Client, or NACL for short. http://blog.chromium.org/2010/05/sneak-peek-at-native-client-sdk.html
In general, no. Most online games are written with Javascript, Flash, the newly hatchedd HTML5 and similar technologies. Perhaps C++ integration is possible on some level, but you definitely cannot write a browser-hosted game purely and entirely in C++.
it could also be done with an ActiveX control. ActiveX only works in IE. there are Netscape plugins that work in other browsers. so make a solution that contains both. you need a book on ActiveX/COM/OLE. Better yet, take a class if you can find one, you will learn far more, because COM is not an easy subject to just read about and then really do - versioning is a big problem.
nope, not supported in firefox. but read this: http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/webmasters-faq.html#activex
some people may have activex controls disabled. if this is the case, your game will not run. you will have to tell the user that they will need to change their security settings in IE. you can get feedback from the object element in javascript as to whether or not the activex loaded. there is code out there for that.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/7sw4ddf8%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
examples are all over the internet.
Hey there,
So I've been heavily focused on design/development using web technology for the last few years (php/mysql, javascript, etc), and I'm a bit hesitant to start learning C++.. At the same time, I see it as a potentially enjoyable learning experience.
To keep things brief, right now I'm developing an online app that plots out certain locations on a map, and you can sort through these locations and do a bunch of other nifty things..sorry to be vague. The point is: I don't see any real advantages of making this an actual "app" when the entire functionality of the app itself can do quite fine through the modern mobile browser..
Not to mention that, by living in a browser, it's much less proprietary
So, my question is: Is there any way to make a simple app that's basically porting the user to my site? I guess it'd be convenient that as an app, the user has a nice little icon to click on when they do need to access it..
Android development relies heavily on Java. So you are all ready on the right track.
However if you just want to make an app that brings people to your website, running javascript I am guessing, this is easy to do with android.
Android supports the webkit browser and has a view group called WebView. Your app can be nothing more than a shortcut on a desktop that opens a webview directly pointed to your website. It could add other options to point to other parts of your website like bookmarks.
WebView webview = new WebView(this);
setContentView(webview);
weview.getSettings().setJavaScriptEnabled(true);
webview.loadUrl("yoursiteurlgoeshere);
A lot of apps on the market are actually based around a WebView. There are other classes that allow you more control over the view, like whether links are opened in the webview or in a new browser, or whether the user is allowed to use the resize options, etc.
Welcome to Android.
There is a massive article on exactly this type of idea. It discusses a number of different things and is well worth the read if you are indeed interested in making a cross-phone web-app. It talks about an html5 facility in the works for creating such a thing as you describe, but it isn't quite universal yet.
Here is an article on making an iphone app in html5.
You can also use phonegap to port your design to andorid.
also, check out a jquery plugin calld jqtouch if you are interseted in developing touch capable applications quickly.
If you are worried about speed and the issue of internet connectivity, you can use html5 local storage features which are available on both android and itouch. Ibm has a great series on these issues and part 2 covers local storage.
No. The problem with web technology on a mobile device is the delay. You are far away from the server, so a lot of the things you can easily do with a normal client creates a very bad user experience on a mobile device. The roundtrip time is simply too large. You have to move much more functionality to the client. This client is also less powerfull, and tends to have limits on caching large elements
How is this related to C++?
There is also a C++ API which is only recently available. Google calls it the NDK (Native Development Kit). Information about it can be found here: http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/index.html
I personally haven't developed using the NDK. The only real reason someone would really need to would be to write a high-performance application that can't stand the overhead of the Java JVM--which is getting more and more rare these days IMO.
As far as creating a simple app with a web container in it, see Phobos' response. That is exactly how I'd do it personally.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
What features should "Tomorrow's" wikis include? How might they incorporate Web 2.0 features like AJAX? What other features are they currently missing? What do you want to see from the next release of your favorite Wiki?
Edit: How might a Wiki be integrated into other products? What "neat uses" could wikis have?
Preview-as-you-type works very nicely indeed here on Stack Overflow. Many wikis don't do that.
Make it really easy to link between pages, eg. that, as you type, the wiki finds likely pages you may be referring to. That way you can make links without having to know the exact title of a target page, and bouncing on the shift key to WriteInCamelCase, or throwing in square brackets. Make it very easy to link to other websites outside the wiki, too (and by "easy" I do not mean like wikisisters, which, if I remember correctly, is like foowiki:ALinkLikeThis).
Similarly, if you can generate links within text automatically, you could, for example, have a mail system that wikifies your email. You create a wiki page, say, for Joel Spolsky, and references to Joel emails in your inbox become links to that page, which you can find by clicking "what links here". (This probably needs something along the lines of Bayesian filtering to prune the stray references to other Joels... your Bayesian Classifier learns that if the context is smart and getting things done, it's Spolsky. If it's flying Viking kittens, it's morely likely Joel Veich).
A variety of RSS feeds for tracking changes would nice, too. (Diffs, full text, changes on pages I've edited, ...)
Wikipedia has grown a fairly colossal categorisation system ("Fictional Cats", anyone?); laying a taxonomy over a wiki's flat namespace could provide another way for users to find their way around. Wikipedia's doing this a little, but in fairly limited ways so far: there are links to the relevant category lists, but you can't, for example, look for a composer called "Smith".
Similarly, wikis give you this big graph of interconnected nodes, of how closely your community sees the relevant concepts as being. Is that interesting? Is that useful? Does anyone who isn't google want to think about this stuff?
PS. If you believe Paul Graham's definition of Web 2.0 as "Democracy, Don't Maltreat Users, and Javascript works now", wikis are two thirds Web 2.0 already.
I am personally already tired of wikis. Wiki as a software is outdated, now it is about wiki as a feature (like my favorite new website, stack overflow).
The main advantage of community wiki — more editing — came into existence when we introduced "Suggested Edits".
With "Suggested Edits", anyone, even an anonymous user, can edit anything — so long as another experienced user reviews and approves their edit.
I'm in the process of choosing a wiki tool, and have looked at numerous packages over the past week. I'm sure there are dozens I haven't even heard of yet, probably good ones. But in general, here's my "beginner's mind" take on the problem.
Wiki markup should be abandoned. A wiki that is limited to wiki markup will only be useful to 'nix hacks and others who get excited about doing things the hard way and insisting that everybody else is stupid. I mean, Morse code is fine with me personally; I don't get what was wrong with a nice, clean dash-dot-dash. Or smoke signals, they were nice, except for the carbon footprint. But times change, and we have to change with them.
Real users (business users, customers, clients) want rich text editing. Period. And when a wiki tries to support both rich text and wiki markup, the results are not pretty. The model is confusing and (apparently) difficult to implement. The fckeditor extension at wikiwiki is a nightmare, for example. It's just not worth it.
Wikis need better access control. The idea that all content should be open to everyone is fine for an open, public, non-profit wiki like this one. But in the business world, that's not how it works. Restricting access is not evil, it's reality. Wiki tools need to do a much better job of providing access control: access to pages and groups of pages based on role or group membership, where groups can be formed by anyone on an ad hoc basis and users can belong to multiple groups and pages can be accessible to multiple groups, at the whim of the page's creator.
Those are the two things that I want, above all else, and I haven't found it in open source, at least not out of the box. Which, of course, is why open source is open source.
There's been some interesting work using wikis for testing and software development. EG, movement towards literate programming -- allowing pages to exist as both code and documentation that is compiled down into one or the other (or, I suppose, both simultaneously).
They have a regular session about this at the annual WikiSym conference.
I think one direction of Wikis is going from open ended collections of documents to an "everyone can edit but with more structure" applications like SO.
Another direction that I've seen is more direct integration with other project support tools, so project planning, issue management, and all that stuff.
Personally, I think the next big direction is going to be some sort of multimedia based Wiki, not just a Wiki where multimedia can be embedded in the text.
I really like MediaWiki. It's widely used and free/Free. The markup syntax is straightforward and allows you to do enough basic styling that you don't need to use custom HTML or to use a WYSIWYG. I assume by "sexy web 2.0" you mean Flash/AJAX, but I like MediaWiki because it works cleanly with basic HTML/Javascript (you don't have to wait for custom widgets to load, etc...).
What makes wikis reach their potential of usefulness is the community that develops around them more than the software itself. You need to find a niche where people are both passionate about (but not criminally insane about) the central topic and have enough technical prowess to log on to a website and edit some text.
"Wiki" is ultimately just a pattern:
Open editing by all/most visitors
Integrated revision tracking and rollback to reduce the cost of mistakes
Simple syntax for cross-linking between articles, and auto-creation of stub articles when referenced
That's not a perfect description, but it's a combination that isn't particularly magic. Successful wikis combine those things with a critical mass of people creating and maintaining content.
The next step, IMO, is less about web 2.0 shininess and more about the integration of better structural information. Adding any metadata beyond "this points to that" is an exercise in brute force hand-markup. Maybe microformats? Maybe the development of more structured knowledgebase software that uses wiki-ish editing UI but a smarter backend? I'm not sure, but I think better handling of the structured data is really the next wave.
Extensibility.
Check out DekiWiki, they are doing an excellent job with this.
DekiWiki extensions
The wiki-of-the-future will be completely editable online, concurrently by everyone. Check out EtherPad for a demo of the techonology.
For me, in terms of Enterprise style uses for a wiki, I have a couple of thoughts;
An effective way to keep and synchronise a central, web based wiki with multiple, offline, desktop style wiki's for people on the go
To move towards wiki as a function as opposed to wiki as a system, so we can integrate the wiki collaborative system into other things