Glossary

TorontoJoe said:
I'm going further in the Keyword Linking direction. Sort of like wiki I suppose. There is one other option I can think of but it's more of a last resort and a ton of work to set up.

This is what Keyword Linking would look like... But I can't imagine how it would work on mobile given there's nothing to hover over. The research continues.


View attachment 2381
Click to expand...

You usually just long press on a word in mobile to bring up the hover options… not sure with this
 
TorontoJoe said:
There's nothing stopping us from just creating a Glossary forum with defined users having the ability to add and edit. It would just need to be managed and kept organized.
Click to expand...

I don’t think an entire forum needs to be made. One thread should be adequate IMO.

OR, doing a page like for the forum rules.
 
My initial post was requesting something simple and not having to be built, something akin to what @Inflorescence describes above. I’m all for however the information gets to the user, whether by thread, page, link, tag or telepathically.
 
I actually have an opinion on those other forums… I said something in pm to ktrain and Mike, but haven’t said anything otherwise. But I think we should condense the number of forums/categories we have. It’s a few too many in my opinion.

There is information that supports the idea that having too many categories (forums) can decrease participation and traffic, and I feel that myself.

Really tags are meant to index and categorize information in a forum, not a bunch of other forums.

This is because most people will just open one forum to read, and will ignore the rest. Like I will never open the forum on Greenhouses because I have no need of one, and no interest in the information on one. So I will miss all of Pete’s updates— they will not get as much reading traffic because it is buried in a subforum in another forum that does not have my interest currently. I don’t have any reason to look in a FAQs category at this time.

I don’t think we want our friends’ post getting dusty and lost because they are in another forum that doesn’t hold our current interest right?

But I do read Fig Talk, and if something is posted in there on greenhouses, I may go ahead and open it up because I see it’s an update from someone I recognize and I want to see what’s going on with them. So a thread that would have been ignored someplace else is being participated with because of where it was posted.

If it could then be tagged as ‘Greenhouses’, then later when someone else wants to do a specific search on greenhouses because they’re building one or whatever, they can just click the tag or search the tag and it will bring up all threads on greenhouses.

I hope this makes sense typing it out. 😅

So because of that, I think that Frequently Searched Topics and Other Fig Resources should be merged into one called “Fig Basics” or something like that. And there should not be subforums in it, unless the threads can be visible in the main category as well when posted. * Even better of it is not a forum and is a place where articles or pages can be written with the relevant info.

The Fig Basics can represent those questions people ask all the time, and can be a resource for newbies. It should be limited for who can post in there though.

*Alternatively, Fig Basics could be a subforum of Fig Talk.
**I don’t know if it’s possible for threads posted to a subforum to also show in the main forum it is a part of? But if so, that could be a way to not use tags if that is preferred. The FAQs subforums could be in Fig Talk instead.
 
Last edited:
bushdoctor82 said:
I’ll have time tomorrow during the day to put something together, at least the start of something - the Eagles don’t play until 8:15
Click to expand...
No rush. Just let me know when you post the thread. Once you do I’ll stick it and you can have at it at your convenience
 
Inflorescence said:
I actually have an opinion on those other forums… I said something in pm to ktrain and Mike, but haven’t said anything otherwise. But I think we should condense the number of forums/categories we have. It’s a few too many in my opinion.

There is information that supports the idea that having too many categories (forums) can decrease participation and traffic, and I feel that myself.

Really tags are meant to index and categorize information in a forum, not a bunch of other forums.

This is because most people will just open one forum to read, and will ignore the rest. Like I will never open the forum on Greenhouses because I have no need of one, and no interest in the information on one. So I will miss all of Pete’s updates— they will not get as much reading traffic because it is buried in a subforum in another forum that does not have my interest currently. I don’t have any reason to look in a FAQs category at this time.

I don’t think we want our friends’ post getting dusty and lost because they are in another forum that doesn’t hold our current interest right?

But I do read Fig Talk, and if something is posted in there on greenhouses, I may go ahead and open it up because I see it’s an update from someone I recognize and I want to see what’s going on with them. So a thread that would have been ignored someplace else is being participated with because of where it was posted.

If it could then be tagged as ‘Greenhouses’, then later when someone else wants to do a specific search on greenhouses because they’re building one or whatever, they can just click the tag or search the tag and it will bring up all threads on greenhouses.

I hope this makes sense typing it out. 😅

So because of that, I think that Frequently Searched Topics and Other Fig Resources should be merged into one called “Fig Basics” or something like that. And there should not be subforums in them, unless the threads can be visible in the main category as well when posted.

The Fig Basics can represent those questions people ask all the time, and can be a resource for newbies. It should be limited for who can post in there though.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying. But feel certain things should be kept separate. Things get buried if combined. Things also as you point out do not get read if it is somewhere of no interest. I started a glossary. But it is not read because it is in the Caprifig section. I am very happy there is a section for Capri. But not all are interested. So many do not know it is there.
 
GoodFriendMike said:
I understand what you are saying. But feel certain things should be kept separate. Things get buried if combined. Things also as you point out do not get read if it is somewhere of no interest. I started a glossary. But it is not read because it is in the Caprifig section. I am very happy there is a section for Capri. But not all are interested. So many do not know it is there.
Click to expand...
 
GoodFriendMike said:
I understand what you are saying. But feel certain things should be kept separate. Things get buried if combined. Things also as you point out do not get read if it is somewhere of no interest. I started a glossary. But it is not read because it is in the Caprifig section. I am very happy there is a section for Capri. But not all are interested. So many do not know it is there.
Click to expand...

We have time to work out how we organize this…. And now we have the tools to do it. And changes don’t need to be permanent. I think we’re at the point where most of the desired core functions are in place. With time we’ll make tweaks.
 
GoodFriendMike said:
I understand what you are saying. But feel certain things should be kept separate. Things get buried if combined. Things also as you point out do not get read if it is somewhere of no interest. I started a glossary. But it is not read because it is in the Caprifig section. I am very happy there is a section for Capri. But not all are interested. So many do not know it is there.
Click to expand...

That is what tags are for. 🙂
 
TorontoJoe said:
We have time to work out how we organize this…. And now we have the tools to do it. And changes don’t need to be permanent. I think we’re at the point where most of the desired core functions are in place. With time we’ll make tweaks.
Click to expand...
OF is a classic case of things never changing even when people repeatedly asked for some things. People get comfortable and no one wants to do the work unless there is a definite need down the road.

It’s just my 2 cents. I read when it was recommended to you to start all of those other forums and I was like, oh no, that is bad advice, because it is too much.
 
TorontoJoe said:
We have time to work out how we organize this…. And now we have the tools to do it. And changes don’t need to be permanent. I think we’re at the point where most of the desired core functions are in place. With time we’ll make tweaks.
Click to expand...
We are in the early stages. Many want different things. But the good thing is we have plenty of time to work things out.
 
Well, if nothing else I think we’ve demonstrated that we’re not averse to change or improvement.

One of the first things we did when moving to XF was to remove a number of redundant forums.

We’re going to continue streamlining the experience. In some cases there are just things that need to be categorized.
 
Well, my last suggestion, (because it’s actually not easy to give suggestions, this isn’t complaining just to complain, it’s speaking up because I feel it is important enough to say something, but I can’t keep doing that because it is uncomfortable,) utilize the other features available to create a more streamlined forum.

No one said to get rid of all categories. Some are needed, but too many creates clutter and actually makes it harder to find things.

Breaking some things into pages or articles for things that are standard information, or not meant to hold a place of discussion, is more advantageous than creating a dozen forums, or a bunch of stickies.

There is a definite misunderstanding of how tags are meant to work within a forum. I really suggest looking more into that. Because categories are being created to stand in for what would ordinarily be a tag.

Figs are a niche subject, it’s really hard when it’s divided up too much.

Okie dokes, have fun everyone!
 
Last edited:
@Inflorescence - I’ll be the first to raise my hand at misunderstanding the use of tags and other features.

@TorontoJoe - A glossary may be able to fit it in smoothly as a thread under the category of Fig Acronyms and Glossary.

The only item I’m unsure of is best way to cite references, or if it’s even necessary. I’m sure not able to define each term, as I may not know plenty of them and would rather not steal someone’s work without giving credit.
 
bushdoctor82 said:
@Inflorescence - I’ll be the first to raise my hand at misunderstanding the use of tags and other features.

@TorontoJoe - A glossary may be able to fit it in smoothly as a thread under the category of Fig Acronyms and Glossary.

The only item I’m unsure of is best way to cite references, or if it’s even necessary. I’m sure not able to define each term, as I may not know plenty of them and would rather not steal someone’s work without giving credit.
Click to expand...
If you copy someone else's work. You could always end it with a - ( Condit 1954) or something like that.
 
I went through my Peterson Field Guides - Trees and Shrubs and selected the terms I thought are also applicable to fig growing. Any thoughts before I dive into other books and more fig specific terminology? I’ll create a separate thread as @TorontoJoe mentioned above next time around.

Branchlet. Except for the twig, the youngest and smallest division of a branch.

Deciduous. Falls off seasonally, usually in autumn

Fruit. The seed-bearing portion of a plant with its associated structures.

Genus. A group of species sufficiently closely related to be given the same generic name.

Hybrid. The offspring of a cross between 2 species

Lateral (bud). To the side rather than at the end of a twig or branchlet.
Leaf Scar. The mark left on the twig at the point of attachment of a leafstalk when the leaf falls.
Leafstalk. The stalk supporting a leaf; petiole
Lenticel. A corky spot on the bark originating as a breathing pore and either circular or somewhat stripelike.

Node. The place, sometimes swollen, on a stem or twig where a leaf is attached or a leaf scar occurs.

Persistent. Remaining attached.
Petiole. See Leafstalk.
Pith. The spongy or hollow center of twig or some stems.

Seed. The portion of the ripened fruit which contains the embryo and its closely associated essential coats.
Side (buds). In a lateral, not end, position.
Species. For practical purposes here: populations whose individuals freely breed with one another and vary only slightly from one another.

Tip (leaf). The apex.
Trunk. The large main stem of a tree.

Variety. That portion of a species which in a certain geographic area differs slightly from the remainder of the species elsewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top