Mongoose 3.0/3.5 Grand Archive - Any Interest?

[Wulf Ratbane]

Wulf, does the template that I have posted at: http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/contenttemplate

It looks all right. I don't know if you're going to be able to find the author information in every case, however. I'd guess you won't be able to find it for a good number of projects, where there is more than one freelancer on the product, and/or where the publisher does not include that information in the S15.

Allowing the publisher to include a discretionary link (back to their own site, or to a PDF reseller) might not be a bad idea.

You're also going to want to make robust use of tags. For example, their are portions of Heroes of High Favor: Dwarves that I might tag with [dwarf], [Craft], [feat], [skill], and [equipment]. Anybody searching for any of those things would be able to find my rules for masterwork dwarven adamantine items.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Have you used Wikidot before? I just migrated my wiki away from there because the interface and editing were terrible, in my opinion.

I moved over to Wetpaint, which is so much easier I can't tell you. There are some annoying things (too many ads, no auto-ToC), but overall the experience has been like night and day.

I use WetPaint myself for some things, and it definitely wins "ease of use" in my book, but it does have some serious limitations that I think would disqualify it from a wiki of this size.

(As for the WetPaint ads-- I use Firefox so I never see them.)

 

[Yair]

Wulf, does the template that I have posted at: http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/contenttemplate

Or what would you suggest as a change. I like having individual entries for each item because then if other people donate material it is easy for a consumer to see who was being generous.

I see several problems with the template. Assuming that the idea is to publish OGC directly to the wiki (which I object to, as mentioned above and in the Yahoo Group - I prefer to attach OGC files, each published under its own OGL), I would suggest the following template instead:

[TEMPLATE]
<Distillation Name>

Product Source: <Product Name>
Publisher: <Publisher Name>, <Publisher's Website>
Author: <Author's Names>
Distiled by <distillers>

The text below, from the "Open Game Content" heading to the "Open Game License" heading, is published under the Open Game License.

Designation of Product Identity: No part of the text below is designated as product identity.

Designation of Open Game Content: All text under the "Open Game Content" heading, excepting the "Open Game License" heading and all text below it, is designated as Open Game Content.

Open Game Content


Open Game License

...

Section 15:

...

<Distillation Name>, copyright Grand Wiki of Dr. Blottenberger, 2008.

[END TEMPLATE]

If the OGL is linked to dynamically, then of course this needs slight altering. But I think the designation of open content is missing in your version.

The major change is in clearly designating where the OGC begins and ends.

Note that both templates assume that we have the agreement to identify the source material and so on. If someone wants to donate their OGC but not allow us to use his PI (like his company's name) to identify it, for some reason, that needs to be changed.

 

[Maggan]

I believe Matthew suggested that others would be welcome. I will be talking with Matthew soon on this. I have had some interest from at least one other publisher.

I think, for completeness, that you should add the SRD itself, and structure the ... structure ... around that.

/M

 

[BPIJonathan]

I think some of the earlier B5 products had a d20 logo on them. The 2nd edition stuff did not.

Ah yes. I see. I run a game that is a mixture of the two editions and never really thought about the logo (or lack there of).

To get this back on topic, I sent Matt an email saying that we would be interested in some participation with our material. Im not sure yet what we would include, but we have a list.

 

[Witchfinder General]

I use WetPaint myself for some things, and it definitely wins "ease of use" in my book, but it does have some serious limitations that I think would disqualify it from a wiki of this size.

As I said in my earlier post in this thread, the wiki feature set must be considered before starting the wiki. Hosting and access to the database is very important for a large community project. At the very least, access to a database dump or ability to export all page revisions is a must. This will allow wiki replication and migration, and thus avoid web host lock-in.

Wikia is an option for free (with ads) MediaWiki hosting, and there are plenty of gaming wikias, such as the Forgotten Realms Wiki.

It should be fairly easy to construct a MediaWiki template for Section 15. These have the advantage that layout and boilerplate changes are applied to all pages that use the template. WikiDot templates (widgets?) seemed more limited, but I could be wrong. I can probably create a MediaWiki mock-up on my wiki for a section 15 template if anyone is interested.

 

[Witchfinder General]

I think, for completeness, that you should add the SRD itself, and structure the ... structure ... around that.

This. An OGC wiki should be usable on its own.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

<Distillation Name>, copyright Grand Wiki of Dr. Blottenberger, 2008.

I'm going to be annoyed if that copyright notice will be stuck on the end of any OGC I contribute.

Ideally the last line in any of my content is my copyright notice.

 

[Yair]

I'm going to be annoyed if that copyright notice will be stuck on the end of any OGC I contribute.

Ideally the last line in any of my content is my copyright notice.

If you enter the entry, of course you can put your copyright notice there. If someone else does, he has to put yours but he also HAS to put his. That's just the way the OGL works. In general, I think a line saying "Grandwiki" is best so as not to meddle with each particular volunteer's name. Of course for anything you enter yourself entering the last copyright as your own is perfectly acceptable.

The volunteer can put the new line one line before the end, though, I believe.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If you enter the entry, of course you can put your copyright notice there. If someone else does, he has to put yours but he also HAS to put his. That's just the way the OGL works.

So then I can take the entry that includes Copyright Me + Grandwiki, make an edit, and republish it again as Copyright Me + Grandwiki + Copyright Me?

What a can of worms.

EDIT: What portion of the work, exactly, is Copyright Grandwiki? Simply the fact that they copied it down?

(These are honest, not snarky, questions. My brain is not really in OGL mode today.)