Talk:Wikibooks

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Definition of the project[edit]

Are there pages equivalent to the following? http://meta.wikibooks.org does not exist, and there's not much in the wikibooks category. 163.1.136.248 09:40, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

More as an FYI, I've updated the links to en:Wikibooks that most closely follow this concept. --Roberth 13:38, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

What is going on[edit]

I do not know where to contact Jimmy, but someone needs to explain fully what the heck Wikibooks is for. We need a clear statement stating what Wikibooks actually is to be used for. There seems to be a lot of confusion. Thanks. --Lord Voldemort 17:33, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Statistics[edit]

Can we get a statistics section going like we have for Wiktionaries? The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.177.127.7 (talk • contribs) .


Frontpage[edit]

Swedish no 10 on the statistic List of Wikibooks. 81.234.119.136 14:38, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Files with the extension "odt"[edit]

I'm MichaelFrey, sys-op on the german Wikibooks.

I don't know which the right place is for this question, but I think some one here can help my ;-).

One of our user want do upload a printable version of a book as "OpenDocument Text", extension "odt".

The reason why we want do use the "OpenDocument Text" format is, it's a Transparent Copy, the format is open, software to edit this format is free software and so on.

Is it possible (maybe for wikibooks only?), to allow the OpenDocument Text format?

Thanks a lot for every answer ;-)

-- MichaelFrey 07:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The main problem is that you can read PDF online, from your web browser, and Google can index it. This is not true with odt. Even if you want to read the odt document saved on your hard disk, you still have to download and install the whole OpenOffice. Compare this to the size of Acrobat Reader or kPDF. Furthermore, do we really need to edit printable versions? One should edit the source at Wikibooks so that anyone can take profit of the changes. But generally, we don't have any official policy forbidding uploading of alternative file formats, like odf. You can do it if you really want. --Derbeth 14:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi!
I'm the user who want to upload it. (sorry for my bad englsh, i'm from germany)
The problem isn't, that PDF is bad, the problem is that PDF isnt editable.
But I want to upload a PDF (for reading) and an editable format, that other users can edit it easyly without make it full new (The layout etc.)
And "normal admins" cant edit the list of permitted File extensions.
The de.wikibooks.org User Zualio --217.95.214.123 15:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


Read Online is a good point, but we want a PDF file and a ODT file.
Edit the printable version is usefull, if some want to update the printable version on the state of the online version.
-- MichaelFrey 15:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
From a technical point, you cannot view PDF online. The web browser downloads it (well, it does the same for HTML) and displays the pdf via an browser plugin, using an external program. Without PDF-Reader, no PDF. So its pretty much the same with OpenDocument, you just have one additional step (i.e. confirm to open the document in $OFFICE_SUITE). $OFFICE_SUITE is not only OpenOffice but also StarOffice (well, of course), KOffice, TextMaker, AbiWord, Scribus, MS-Office (plugins are currently developed by OASIS AND Microsoft), WordPerfect and IBM Workplace (both Corel and IBM are members of the OpenDocument Format Alliance) - so sooner or later, odf can be displayed on every computer with a word processing software. So you don't have to download OpenOffice. Just wanted to make this clear, as this seems to be the most common argument against OpenDocument support.
Furthermore, Google is a member of the OpenDocument Format Alliance as well. --Irongate 21:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
From a practical point of view, this is no difference - you can view PDF in your browser (no matter how it is done). You cannot do the same with ODT. For me, any technical details are completely unimportant for end users. --Derbeth 05:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
So you make PDF from ODT and want to share this ODT? This makes sense, I'm for it.
I understand, you cannot upload .odt file to the server, yes? I haven't heard much about upload restrictions. Probably you have to talk to MediaWiki developers at #wikimedia-tech IRC channel. Or, I can do it for you - but I'm a bit busy at the moment. --Derbeth 18:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


For all: Short form of the Chat with TimStarling, MichaelFrey and John N.

The advantages of ODT over PDF isn't the question.
The important question is this:
Is it possible to break into the computer of our users?

If you have infomation about the security of the Opendocument Format, please post them here with the source (links preferred)

-- MichaelFrey 06:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


HI!
(And again sorry for my bad english, I hope you can understand me)
I know, security is the most important thing, an i dont have the knowledge, that I'm able to say "its secure" or "it isnt secure", but I think these things have to be consided:
1st:
The ISO want to declare OpenDocument to a standart (They wouldn't do if it isnt secure)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opendocument#Standardization
2nd:
The government of Belgium and the US state Massachusetts and the administrations of Wien and Munich will do all digital text transfers in OpenDocument(and PDF). When Opendocument wouldnt be secure, they wouldnt save official government texts in Opendocument format.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument
The de.wikibooks.org User Zualio --217.95.209.7 21:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


Thanks a lot :-)
One of the problem of Open Document is OpenOffice.org Basic and things like this.
I don't think that they are written in the "Opendocument Standard", but it's saved in the ODT File ...
The good message about this macros, you can find and remove them very easy.
You can a ODT File open like a zip file and check the files. If a directory exist with a name like "basic", then make a failure message for the uploader.
Maybe can the developers make a feature like this?
The Mediawiki software can a the moment use metadata from pictures, I think (or better I hope) it's possible do make something like this with ODT.
-- MichaelFrey 10:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi!
Its very easy to look for a folder there with PHP.
The problem is, that you need a PHP-Extension for zip-files like zziplib ( http://zziplib.sourceforge.net/ ).
After installing its very easy:
You open a zip-File with zip_open(), search for the folder with zip_read() and eventually you look, if data is in the folder with the functions zip_entry_open() and zip_entry_read()
A german Manual is here: http://php.net/manual/de/ref.zip.php
An english Manual here: http://php.net/manual/en/ref.zip.php
Finally the most problem is the needed PHP-Extension...
Without it you can't read zip-files with PHP or script languages I know..
I hope I could help
The de.wikibooks.org User Zualio --217.95.231.203 16:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I have a new idea: In the new Version of PHP (5.2), released on 2nd november, is a support for zip-archives. I've read this, i dont know how it works. I hope this edit will be read.
The de.wikibooks.org User Zualio --217.95.230.215 10:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

When???[edit]

Can I know, when the selection for the new logo of Wikibooks will be end.-Putera Luqman Tunku Andre 11:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

We don't have a firm timeline at this point; see Talk:Wikibooks/Logo#Time_to_Finish.21 for details and discussion.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

And we now have a new logo!  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Alemannic Wikibooks[edit]

The Alemannic Wikibooks has been imported into the Alemannic Wikipedia. Now it's a separate namespace within als:wp: Alemannischi Biecherei (Wikibooks). --Holder 08:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

More statistics[edit]

I recommend to add the following items:

The number of books is more interesting for books than the number of chapters (sites in main namespace). -- Juetho (talk) (admin in de-WB) 11:05, 2 January 2016 (UTC)