Talk:Lifeline/project

From LifeWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Where is this project now?

I became aware of this project through a little ad that I saw probably when I was reading and editing Lifeline Volume 2 and 3 two days ago. Today I had a moment and thought I'd help out with it, but I couldn't get the message back today, and didn't find a reference to it on How to contribute (from the sidebar) or LifeWiki:Helping out, either.

Now the page says that Lifeline Volume 5 needs check_text, but the page itself has the hatnote saying "This article may contain spelling mistakes and/or errors that will not be corrected", which seems to mean that check_text is completed. Well, I thought, this project may be just a bit behind the time, so I looked at Lifeline#Summary of the issues, which goes up to 5, and I thought that apparently issue 6 is in the works now. To my surprise, I saw the same hatnote on Lifeline Volume 6, and even on Lifeline Volume 7, which clearly doesn't look complete yet.

Is this project still going on? Where is OCR now? If it's still worthwhile, how about updating this page and linking to it from the two hub pages. Or else, how about removing the little ad? (Sorry that I don't know anymore where I saw it.) Micromegas (talk) 06:43, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I think the project is largely dead dormant. But there's obviously lots of work to be done on these, so if you want to be bold, jump in and start editing (and creating images and RLEs, and all that), that'd be wonderful.
Speaking of images and RLEs, I believe it would actually be better to use Template:EmbedViewer and on-wiki RLE snippets these days than static (or even animated) images. If others agree, earlier Lifeline issues should also be updated accordingly, eventually. Apple Bottom (talk) 10:02, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
This might be a little bit tricky in places. Most things named and identified in LIFELINE are still called the same thing, and are already identified by that name in the LifeWiki. They might well have a different phase and/or orientation in LIFELINE... but do we want another RLE for the same pattern in the RLE: namespace? An example is 'roteightor', LIFELINE volume 6 page 3 -- a different phase is used in the LifeWiki, and another different phase shows up in the Life Lexicon. Maybe an "RLE:Lifelineroteightor" wouldn't hurt -- but it would add up to a lot of clutter, and just using images with maybe a link to roteightor might be a sensible alternative. (?) Dvgrn (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
After I wrote the above, I realized that reading the page scans directly has advantages, above all because it conveys a true historic feel. (Also, some images, such as the 4×12 torus on Lifeline_Volume_5#Page 5 and many lifecomics can only be appreciated or understood in the scan.) After I added the previous/next buttons to the images, it became a smooth reading experience. Instead of transcribing the scans and investing time into solving the various graphics problems, we could decide to just make it easier to peruse the scans. For that, I would suggest:
  1. Add previous/next links on every page. (We could write a template for that, but there are some problems to be solved first.)
  2. Write page summaries that better open up the scans. I started in that direction at Lifeline#Volume_6_OCTOBER_1972, e.g. by adding links to pages; let me know what you think about that. If we decide to not transcribe the scans for the time being, we could
    1. link directly to the scans from the page numbers of the list
    2. add any germane links (such as the one to the Grandfather Problem) to those summaries, which is something I avoided because I wanted to limit the links to those directly to the transcribed pages, which already contain the links.
If, on the other hand we want to turn the pages into living parts of this wiki, we could decide to introduce headlines (or at least anchors) for the original headlines and link to them from the summary. Micromegas (talk) 15:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Replying to Dvgrn, re: name collisions -- I'd suggest using a systematic naming scheme, e.g. RLE:Lifeline vol02 fig01 (corresponding to this image). This would lead to the occasional duplicated pattern, of course, but I think that's fine.
Replying to Micromegas-- the scans will certainly not go away. I also think there's value in transcribing these issues, both for readability, for easy manipulation of patterns (once they're all using LifeViewer), to aid e.g. blind people who rely on screenreaders, and to aid search engines etc. indexing these pages. But I know it's a lot of effort, and I imagine it's not a top priority for most (certainly isn't for me). Adding navigation links sounds like a good idea in any case. Apple Bottom (talk) 18:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Apple Bottom (talk) 18:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)