Librivox Wiki

Non-reading activities need your help too!
Gesine
Posts: 14156
Joined: December 13th, 2005, 4:16 am

Post by Gesine » February 21st, 2006, 1:49 pm

I've edited Harvey's list so the points are numbered. Perhaps this will help in referring to it. When something gets done on the list, please post here ("Harvey's list point 3") and an admin can mark it done on Harvey's original post. That way, we don't all need to look over everything again and again.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination circles the world." Albert Einstein

harvey
Posts: 257
Joined: February 16th, 2006, 4:51 pm
Location: Idaho

Post by harvey » February 21st, 2006, 2:29 pm

kri wrote:The big LibriVox logo is the link back to the main page.
A little experimenting shows there's more of a navigational problem than I
had thought.

As Kri suggests, I had expected the LibriVox logo to take me back to the
main site (www.librivox.org). But it doesn't. It takes you back to the wiki's
welcome page. I think it should take you to the main site.

But if the logo is changed to link to the main site, then there'd be no way to jump
back to the wiki welcome page, since the current logo link is the only way.
I suggest the addition of a permanet tab labeled something like "Wiki Welcome",
or "Start Page" or "Table of Contents". Users should be able to get to the
wiki's front page with one click from anywhere within the wiki.

(I've integrated this material into "Harvey's List".)
Last edited by harvey on February 21st, 2006, 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

harvey
Posts: 257
Joined: February 16th, 2006, 4:51 pm
Location: Idaho

Post by harvey » February 21st, 2006, 2:35 pm

Gesine wrote:I've edited Harvey's list so the points are numbered.
<whew!> I didn't think I'd put in numbers and was wondering how they had appeared (:-)
I recognized it immediately as a good idea for the very reason you state.
I'm only disappointed I didn't think of it.
Last edited by harvey on February 22nd, 2006, 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

harvey
Posts: 257
Joined: February 16th, 2006, 4:51 pm
Location: Idaho

Post by harvey » February 21st, 2006, 3:11 pm

Wiki > Software We Use: questions

Master Wiki Knave,

Here are three audio programs I use almost daily (and that's before I
made my first LibriVox recording over the past weekend):
  • Total Recorder
  • RazorLame and LAME
  • Cool Edit 2000
I'm planning to add Total Recorder and probably RazorLame. [Both done.]

I'm wondering about having a page for brief introductions to all the
software. The idea is for something intermediate between the
sentence-long summaries on the Software We Use page and the more
in-depth FAQs.

Cool Edit 2000

This is the program I've used for several years when I want to look at
the wave form and to do precise editing. I've already written informal
user guides for some aspects of Cool Edit. Most of that -- probably
all of it -- would be applicable to Adobe Audition.

A question I have seems like it needs a policy decision: Cool Edit
2000 is available for download around the Internet, along with names
and passwords (ie, "cracks") to unlock all its features. What are the
policy or legal implications of telling people how to get hold of this
program, even though it's now orphaned software?

Another question: I have yet to see any mention of linking to other sites
(other than perhaps the Wikipedia and flickr for photos) from the wiki
in terms of augmenting the how-to pages. For example, I know of a few
good tutorials on Cool Edit / Audition, and it seems simpler to link
to them rather than duplicate / rewrite their content for LibriVox.

Gesine added "Gord's list" of software. It contains duplicate entries from
the other lists. I'm not certain if these should be removed or left in.

Cheers,
harvey
Last edited by harvey on February 21st, 2006, 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Kristen
Posts: 390
Joined: September 26th, 2005, 12:36 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Contact:

Post by Kristen » February 21st, 2006, 6:09 pm

Here are two new images to replace the logos in the forums and wiki. They ought to help make it clearer what happens when you click on them.

Image
Image

I don't have admin access to the wiki, so can't change that one. But I do have access to the bowels of the forums, so I will try to remember where in the phpBB heirarchy the forum one belongs.
Kristen
http://www.mediatinker.com
[url=http://librivox.org/wiki/moin.cgi/KristenMcQuillin/]My recordings & claimed chapters[/url]

vee
Posts: 585
Joined: October 10th, 2005, 7:35 pm
Location: Columbia, MD
Contact:

Post by vee » February 21st, 2006, 6:29 pm

At the moment we only have a page for Audacity and GarageBand. I think having similar pages for other applications is a good idea. You can then have external links and the like to other how-tos, as well as have our own user written ones.

I like having LV created how-tos because they can address issues that we tend to run into. I don't see any problem with having links to other how-tos which may be more in-depth. Maybe at the bottom of each FAQ (best name I have for now) of links to additional resources.

How about if on the Software list we link to the manufacturer site until we have a FAQ/How-to up, where we could place the manufacturer link at the bottom?

In terms of linking to non-free software. I would hesitate to provide links for possibly illegal activities. I'm not sure if you can still buy Cool Edit 2000. For now I'd shy towards being more conservative on that, unless we get an all clear.
Chris Vee
"You never truly understand something until you can explain it to your grandmother." - Albert Einstein

Squiddhartha
Posts: 161
Joined: September 27th, 2005, 3:44 pm
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Contact:

Post by Squiddhartha » February 21st, 2006, 6:36 pm

I'll see what I can do to address the wiki logo/navigation issues, but I'm about to go on a business trip, so it might be a couple-three days; your patience is appreciated...
This username is also my Gmail address.
"But if you've got a nuclear bomb, then you don't need the Jell-O!"

Gesine
Posts: 14156
Joined: December 13th, 2005, 4:16 am

Post by Gesine » February 21st, 2006, 6:36 pm

Harvey wrote:Gesine added "Gord's list" of software. It contains duplicate entries from the other lists. I'm not certain if these should be removed or left in.
I was secretly hoping someone would edit it - I just dumped it in for now, because I happened upon it in the forum when I was looking for ID3 tag software. I didn't have the time to clean it up myself. Ideally, the software should all be categorised better, and each section split into OSs for quick reference. But it doesn't (and can't) all happen at once... :)
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination circles the world." Albert Einstein

harvey
Posts: 257
Joined: February 16th, 2006, 4:51 pm
Location: Idaho

Post by harvey » February 21st, 2006, 7:16 pm

Squiddhartha wrote: if there's a word that's already in mixed case that you don't want to have turned into a link (e.g., McLuhan, McDonald, etc), you can use Mc{{{}}}Luhan or Mc``Luhan to prevent the linkification.

You can also surpress WikiName linking by putting an exclamation point in front of the word:

Code: Select all

!MacDonald
The underlying text remains easier to read.

harvey
Posts: 257
Joined: February 16th, 2006, 4:51 pm
Location: Idaho

Post by harvey » February 21st, 2006, 7:59 pm

Gesine wrote:
Harvey wrote:Gesine added "Gord's list" of software. It contains duplicate entries from the other lists.
I was secretly hoping someone would edit it - I just dumped it in for now. Ideally, the software should all be categorised better, and each section split into OSs for quick reference.
Hope no more. I removed the duplicates.

And I subdivided the existing main categories by OS, but I don't much
like the visual effect; the page is too long now. There has to be a
better way to handle this. One problem is the set of main categories
seems too arbitrary given the versatility of so many of the programs.

Suppose we eliminate the categories and have a single list of all
software in alphabetical order and a comparison chart, with programs
down the side and features across the top. The names of the programs
in the chart link to the list. Readers scan the table for the
features they are after and pick the software that matches.

I've started such a table. Look and let me know what you think:
http://librivox.org/wiki/moin.cgi/SoftwareWeUse . Before I do any more
to it, I need to find out how to apply a Cascading Style Sheet to it
to simplify maintenance. Stephan was working on this last week.

Cheers,
harvey

Peter Why
Posts: 4953
Joined: November 24th, 2005, 3:54 am
Location: Chigwell (North-East London, U.K.)

Post by Peter Why » February 22nd, 2006, 1:03 am

Harvey, thanks for the tip about !

I've replaced all the clumsy {{{}}} in the Volunteers list.

Peter

Aldark
Posts: 158
Joined: January 11th, 2006, 1:08 pm
Location: Dayton, Ohio

Post by Aldark » February 22nd, 2006, 6:34 am

vee wrote: How about if on the Software list we link to the manufacturer site until we have a FAQ/How-to up, where we could place the manufacturer link at the bottom?
We do this at work - either link to the manufacturer or vendor (if easier to get information from) for our products.

vee wrote: In terms of linking to non-free software. I would hesitate to provide links for possibly illegal activities. I'm not sure if you can still buy Cool Edit 2000. For now I'd shy towards being more conservative on that, unless we get an all clear.
I'm not sure we should worry about illegal activities - no way LibriVox should feel responsible if a user decided to try and hack a registration. My opinion is LibriVox would only benefit from letting user's know what is out there.
We could simply state "Free Software" and "You Pay Software" (Whatever a better term would be. :) )
Now I see what Harvey has done in the table - good stuff.

- Scott
Last edited by Aldark on February 22nd, 2006, 8:44 am, edited 2 times in total.

kri
Posts: 5354
Joined: January 3rd, 2006, 8:34 pm
Location: Keene NH
Contact:

Post by kri » February 22nd, 2006, 7:22 am

harvey wrote:
And I subdivided the existing main categories by OS, but I don't much
like the visual effect; the page is too long now. There has to be a
better way to handle this. One problem is the set of main categories
seems too arbitrary given the versatility of so many of the programs.
I wouldn't worry too much about pages being too long. That's what the table of contents code is for

[[TableOfContents([maxdepth])]]

Just use headers with == or === before and after the header title to designate each section. Then they'll appear in the table of contents for peole to click on.

harvey
Posts: 257
Joined: February 16th, 2006, 4:51 pm
Location: Idaho

Post by harvey » February 22nd, 2006, 11:16 am

Aldark wrote:
vee wrote: In terms of linking to non-free software.
I would hesitate to provide links for possibly illegal activities. I'm not sure
if you can still buy Cool Edit 2000. For now I'd shy towards being more
conservative on that, unless we get an all clear.
I'm not sure we should worry about illegal activities - no way LibriVox
should feel responsible if a user decided to try and hack a registration.
My opinion is LibriVox would only benefit from letting user's know what is
out there.
Cool Edit 2000 is no longer for sale; it was abandoned when Adobe
bought Syntrillium, the developer of the Cool Edit family (Adobe chose
to continue only with the "Pro" version, renamed to "Audition", which
now lists for $350).

So the unanswered question is this: Is it legal to apply a name and
password, that one did not pay for, to Cool Edit 2000 (this "registers"
the program and unlocks all its features) given that it's no longer
possible to pay for it? We need an answer. Is there a lawyer in the
house? What does Hugh have to say?

I searched the Adobe Web site for both "Cool Edit 2000" and "Cool
Edit". There was no sign of the issue of using unpaid copies of the
program in the results. Either Adobe is not concerned, or they don't
want to give people any ideas and so are silent about it.

Here's the specific reason I raised this question. The existing
FAQs-user guides for specific programs tell how to acquire the
programs. I'm wondering how to handle that for Cool Edit 2000, since
I'm thinking about putting together a user guide for it, recognizing
that it overlaps with Audition. So that's why I asked about any
complications arising from my telling readers how to obtain and "hack"
the orphaned Cool Edit 2000, even indirectly by telling them how to
find the files and the hack information (ie, user names and passwords
that will unlock the program).


I disagree with the idea that we should not worry about illegal
activities, particularly if LibriVox is comtemplating suggesting
something of unknown status (eg, hacking Cool Edit 2000). That's
because we should be concerned about the reputation of LibriVox
(I'm not suggesting that anyone isn't). Being seen, even indirectly,
to endorse or condone illegal activities won't do LibriVox any good.
Furthermore, legality is already front-and-center at LibriVox in the
matter of copyright.

On the other hand, if LibriVox disagrees with the legal status of
something, and decides to engage in civil disobedience as a form of
protest, that's another matter. But if so, it should be done
explicitly, above board, and out in the open. That is, it should be
stated clearly as a matter of policy. And is something for the
administration at LibriVox to take the lead on.


My own opinion is this. Even if it is strictly illegal to hack Cool
Edit 2000 to use it, the law that says so is unreasonable because
Adobe abandoned the product and won't take your money to allow you
to use it legally. Therefore, I have no moral qualms about people using
it illegally. Interestingly, the associate pastor of my church is a
former software developer; I asked him about this issue, and he shares
my view. But this is not a good argument for LibriVox to skirt the law.
Last edited by harvey on February 22nd, 2006, 1:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Aldark
Posts: 158
Joined: January 11th, 2006, 1:08 pm
Location: Dayton, Ohio

Post by Aldark » February 22nd, 2006, 11:47 am

harvey wrote:I searched the Adobe Web site for both "Cool Edit 2000" and "Cool Edit". There was no sign of the issue of using unpaid copies of the program in the results. Either Adobe is not concerned, or they don't
want to give people any ideas and so are silent about it.
I agree with what you said about Cool Edit 2000, I wasn't totally aware of the status of it.

In the past Adobe has been very propietary about their products - in the early days of PDF they didn't want anyone to write programs to create or edit PDFs w/o using their products - I know because I used to argue with them about it.
Last edited by Aldark on February 22nd, 2006, 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply