h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I just stumbled upon a wonderful website the other day which would teach you to play the guitar. (I've no link because I lost it again, but that's irrelevant).

There were pictures of how to hold the guitar, diagrams of musical notation, audio files that you could tune your guitar to and videos of how to play. The whole thing was using the computer in the way it should be used.

And then I thought how old fashioned and 1990s h2g2 is, with its text-only interface.

I've so much I want to say, and I can't say it because we've no facility for putting diagrams and pictures in, never mind audio and videos.

Maybe I should be writing my own less restricted website.

There are a few instructive diagrams among the pictures archives, Gnomon - I think it's just that the Community Artists used to do them, and they aren't much of an active group any more. Can't diagrams be added through the Photographers group? After all, it's all just pixels...

For example, there's a good few diagrams on A476606. I'm sure if they can be designed, they can be added.

Oh, the Eds have said that if we provide diagrams they'll put them into the articles, no problem. But we're not allowed write the articles in such a way that they rely on the diagrams. So my "Linear B" Entry could not be written under the current rules. Nor could the ones I want to write: How to play the clarinet, Introduction to topology, Tesselation, Mathematical Knots, Identifying Geese, Colour and How Humans See it, The Evolution of Writing.

I'm sure that if you drew an appropriate diagram and emailed it to the Eds, they'd allow you write an Entry that needed to refer to it. The rules are there to stop Entries being filled with spurious diagrams, not to stop people from writing Entries, surely? I'd have a word over at Feedback if I were you, explaining that there are some Entries that just can't be written without accompanying diagrams. Better to try to change things than just get frustrated with it...

I might give that a try. The Mathematical Knots one is one I'm particularly interested in. There's very little on the web that actually explains it properly, and even the book I learnt it from is riddled with mistakes. (I wrote to the publishers pointing the more obvious ones out and never even got an acknowledgment).

If you draw a diagram of the right dimensions for h2g2, it's quite a simple matter for the Eds to make it into a blob. You can then embed the blob before you enter the Entry into PR. I don't see why that would be a problem; Post cartoons are just embedded blobs, so creating the odd blob here and there for Entries that really need one should be an exception worth making.

There are Edited Entries that use more than text. This was done in 1999! A61345

And the eds at the time made a film clip for this Edited Entry in 2002: A863309 (Real Player needed)

And there's a film clip here too, from 2003: A1105426

So it's not that h2g2 doesn't support these things, perhaps in fact the site started a trend. It's just that it doesn't do it any more.

Gnomon, you're the h2g2 god - I bet if you asked the Eds to do something, they'd do it.

For a site that started the concept of the online encyclopedia, we've been left pretty far behind by more recent developments. Then again, though, as a philosophy I'm not too fond of the Web 2.0 one. What do we want, for Google to acquire us? Then we can "tag" all the entries in the Guide. Yes, I use these tools, like Facebook or Gmail or YouTube, but some sites just don't need them. When I started my own website worthlessdrivel.net, I made a conscious decision to keep it quite uninteractive, and in fact put my foot down against other members of the editorial board. There's a certain nostalgia to be had for straight-up HTML, text-only sites... but yeah, I'll definitely grant that shiny things are fun too.

There are plenty of sites available. surely, if you want bells and whistles etc. but I would like to put a word in for people with older computers, with less technological capabilities (the computers, not the people but then again....)

I find h2g2 easy to access, easy to use and requiring few special skills. It is the website I use most, and I really think the BBC should maintain a site that is open to all. I know that probably means less progress which is frustrating for the likes of Gnomon but there are plenty of places for him to use his many talents, and his own website would be a revelation I have no doubt.

Websailor

Just as an aside, is there any particular reason why entries accepted to the EG are limited to the one header photograph?

I assume that it’s just convention but I would have thought that many of the entries would have been enhanced by a couple or three photos rather than just the one.

DK

I agree, diagrams & pictures could greatly enhance some entries. Websites that have loads of fancy graphics & movies tend to make me move elsewhere fast!

"H2G2 is dated!"

Hold the front page.

Could SVG (scalable vector graphics) be incorporated in the articles? as I understand it (hahaha!) SVG is a format that many up-to-date browsers now support, as is XML and AJAX.
Do people still use text-only browsers?

I do, but only because I occasionally use a UNIX-running machine whose mouse does not work in the GUI - so I'm just weird.

A lot of the problem is that just as h2g2 starts experimenting with extras, something goes wrong. The dotcom bust, the BBCs restrictions, then as we get back on our feet, the BBC suddenly realises there is a lot more New Media salary than they had noticed and so restructures. Then restructures again, and every time, h2g2 slips down the priorities list. The further it slips, the less up to date it is, and the less up to date it is, the further it slips. Or it may be something completely different. It can be shaming seeing the new DNA sites launched with bells and whistles and h2g2's just got a triangle, but at least we know what it's possible to do with it, and some of the bells and whistles do end up a whimper on the restructing floor.

Although there are lots of these 'volunteer' groups these days, if genuine authors wrote an entry and let the Eds know there was a decent picture to go with it, there is more of a chance than ever that it will get added - even though the advice might still be 'don't if it relies on a picture' - if h2g2 is as desperate for entries as it seems, then why would they say no? Audio and video might be more of an issue, because it was only done a couple of times and we're already set up for pictures, but I wouldn't stop the need for a picture or diagram stop me putting an entry on h2g2 - even if you have to link to a picture on another website because eventually it may come up in the Photographers list and you can just tell the Eds there is already a picture ready and waiting.

If that all fails, then much as I hate to say it, you were writing the Guide before you came here, then you found h2g2. Why not carry on doing it that way and publicise your articles in your journal? If h2g2 never catches up, then you may find another site that suits you as well or better - although if you do I don't think you should be allowed to leave h2g2.

Fascinating notion Gnomon. I'd be interested in hearing what sort of things you would like to do. I too have thought of setting up my own off-shoot website, perhaps in php, or even really pushing the boat out and using flash. Though truthfully I don't know if anyone else would be interested... which would be the whole point of the site. I would want it to be a community thing.

When h2g2 started it was something new and open to new ideas. I fear too much has been taken out of h2g2 through fear of the site closing down, and too many editors changing, and just about getting by, to the point where the site, if not side-lined has ceased any serious creative development on the editorial (the people behind the site not the contributors who are wonderful) front.

I would love to see more hand made stuff, silly boards that you can write on... let your mind go wild. I've tried numerous times to get stuff done using Table Tag art (using tables and changing the colours to make pictures) which while rewarding, is extremely cumbersome.

I think this site, its community - needs to have a focus of its own. People focusing on it, not just maintaining it.

Potentially there are certain free web hosting sites (with sufficient web space, not just a few megs) where you could begin to start such a venture, when I have been considering such an idea. But you would have to find funding ultimately to sustain that site. Whether that be in the form of donations, or otherwise. The community that this site sustains deserves a much more innovative website.

Thats just my anyway

This reminds me a bit of how, when the BBC closed down the DNA Get Writing site, some of the core members formed their own site, Writers Dock (writersdock.org), supported by donations and a few ads. It's since become a fairly popular and active site in its own right.

A526213 has many images. Most have just the header image. Just convention, I imagine, as you say.

TRiG.