Ask Slashdot: Multimedia-Based Wiki For Learning and Business Procedures? 97
kyle11 writes I'm scratching my head at how to develop a decent wiki for a large organization I work in. We support multiple technologies, across multiple locations, and have ways of doing things that become exponentially convoluted. I give IT training to many of these users for a particular technology, and other people do for other stuff as well. Now, I hate wikis because everyone who did one before failed and gave them a bad name. If it starts wrong, it is doomed to failure and irrelevance.
What I'm looking for would be something like a Wiki with YouTube built in — make a playlist of videos with embedded links for certain job based tasks. And reuse and recycle those videos in other playlists of other tasks as they may be applicable. It would go beyond the actual IT we work with and would include things like, "Welcome to working in this department. Here are 20 videos detailing stupid procedures you need to go through to request access to customers' systems/networks/databases to even think about doing your job." I tried MediaWiki and Xwiki, and maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I can't seem to find a way to tweak them to YouTube-level simplicity for anyone to contribute to without giving up on the thing because its' a pain in the butt.
My only real requirement is that it not be cloud-based because it will contain certain sensitive information and I'd like it all to live on one virtual machine if at all possible. I can't be the only one with this problem of enabling many people to contribute and sort their knowledge without knowing how an HTML tag works, or copying files into something more complicated than a web browser. What approaches have any of you out there taken to trying to solve a similar problem?
What I'm looking for would be something like a Wiki with YouTube built in — make a playlist of videos with embedded links for certain job based tasks. And reuse and recycle those videos in other playlists of other tasks as they may be applicable. It would go beyond the actual IT we work with and would include things like, "Welcome to working in this department. Here are 20 videos detailing stupid procedures you need to go through to request access to customers' systems/networks/databases to even think about doing your job." I tried MediaWiki and Xwiki, and maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I can't seem to find a way to tweak them to YouTube-level simplicity for anyone to contribute to without giving up on the thing because its' a pain in the butt.
My only real requirement is that it not be cloud-based because it will contain certain sensitive information and I'd like it all to live on one virtual machine if at all possible. I can't be the only one with this problem of enabling many people to contribute and sort their knowledge without knowing how an HTML tag works, or copying files into something more complicated than a web browser. What approaches have any of you out there taken to trying to solve a similar problem?
First.... (Score:3, Insightful)
First one to suggest SharePoint gets shot
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sorry, you seem to be indicating they should use Sharepoint, but then you say "Don't waste your time fiddling with shitty products."
Mixed messages dude.
Re: (Score:2)
Rather that than be forced to *use* SharePoint.
Re: (Score:1)
Lol. Thanks for the warning.
A content problem (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with any system is content. You said all Wikis have failed so far, have you figured out why? The answer may not be in the format itself but rather the content it provides. If you can't get the content right, and most importantly relevant, then it doesn't matter what technology you will use.
My suggestion is before you even consider doing this you need buyin from the various departments you support to help create content. If you launch with little you will be irrelevant. If you put it off long enough to fill it and make it useful then you may have a chance of surviving.
"Build it and they will come" does not apply here.
Re:A content problem (Score:5, Insightful)
What the poster wants doesn't sound like a Wiki at all.
Unless he wants ALL other random people to add, change and update information, he would be better off using any random CMS.
Wiki's trade content creation features for maintenance/editing features.
Content in a Wiki is easy to change and hard to make look perfect.
If you want perfect looking content and don't need the ability for anybody to change content in a few seconds, don't use a Wiki.
Re:A content problem (Score:4)
The more fundamental problem is that "Content management" and "Content" are fundamentally different things, and it's not a difference of degree. There is no CMS so brilliant, even in principle, that it will produce a single line of information for you. The best you can hope for is a system that auto-magics the production of indexes, bibliographies, other organizational stuff, and doesn't munge the formatting into unreadability.
You'd be better off with 'content' that is actually worthwhile tacked together with threadbare HTML hacked out in notepad than you would be with the finest of all possible CMSes and nothing to put in it...
First one to suggest SharePoint gets shot (Score:1)
Bingo. (Score:2)
The problem with any system is content.
Bingo.
Use static HTML, CSS, the F4Player [gokercebeci.com] and see the lectures catch on. Once you've got content, choose/buid you system based on that. That might even be Wordpress or Joomla or something.
Re: (Score:2)
"Training" video snippets, regurgitated by various 'learning management systems' are something to be treated very carefully. Video tends to be slow and have poor information density as reference material(for, say, the arcana of some ghastly line-of-business software mess); but are also fairly shallow, and a bit condescending, as a substitute for a little hands-on guidance for you
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I may be being pessimistic here but I don't believe such a system actually exits. The problem is that its phenomenally difficult to write something that can do all that you want but also be simple and easy to use. A very crude solution might be a basic database to store your lookup archive with a basic lookup code on each record, and a (manual) file store using directories to store the videos. A pain in the arse to use but at least you don't get chained into a system that's pretty much guaranteed to reach a
Re: (Score:1)
Atlassian Confluence? (Score:1)
Hi
I am not sure a Wiki is the right thing for you: you are effectively looking for a training / knowledge sharing platorm with strong video focus.
A the strength of a Wiki to me is its editability, which I am not sure you'll need...
So you might want to consider looking a bit around for video based trainnig platforms?
Anyway, if clollaboration and editing (rather than just consumption and dissemination) is of interest: my company is using Atlassian's Confluence which is easy to use and quite powerful at the sa
Re: (Score:1)
If you expand a bit the circle of candidates... (Score:1)
As an extra bonus, it might, just might, allow your office documents to be reasonably integrated within the wiki (fi. search box).
Although, I try to stray away of not open source software, I had overall good experience with Confluence a couple years ago.
Also, Apache Software Foundation has also been relying on it for years (after all, that's how they got hacked
Let us know how it would or would not fit your bill.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolute nonsense. Moodle is for managing content and it happens to have an optional plug in to monitor viewers ('students') progress.
But as others have noted, it is not the platform that is the problem, it is getting and keeping fresh content that matters. Any platform with good content would work.
Re: (Score:1)
Using that logic, just because you know how to sling an insult, doesn't mean you should.
Look deeper (Score:1)
You don't need a wiki to explain the horrendously convoluted business practices. You need to get the horrendously convoluted business practices simplified.
I know you're in the IT department not senior management, but that does put you in something of a position of strength if you can quantify the time being wasted by the current procedures and explain how a simpler procedure could work and how much money it could save. Just be careful, you may be writing your own job description as the lucky (?!) one who ge
Dokuwiki if you must (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not sure using a wiki is really the answer but if you insist then try Dokuwiki. It doesn't get much simpler on the end user side when it comes to using a Wiki.
https://www.dokuwiki.org/dokuw... [dokuwiki.org]
(1) What's in it for me. Instant gratification. (Score:1)
A tutorial is not the same as a reference manual. A wiki is the latter.
If you want to teach somebody a bunch of skills you need to print out a worksheet with the skills listed i
(2) Teaching materials (Score:1)
Atlassian Confluence (Score:1)
Adobe RH (Score:1)
Try Confluence (Score:2)
Try Atlassian Confluence
https://www.atlassian.com/soft... [atlassian.com]
It is not free (as in beer) but IMO it meets your needs. This is the most user friendly wiki software I know and has roles for knowledge base system and also means to attach files (f.e. videos). You can put in few macros that will automagically embed attached videos in web player.
Read on here:
https://confluence.atlassian.c... [atlassian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The poster specifically asked for a non-cloud-based solution.
Re:Try Confluence (Score:4, Informative)
You can run your own instance - my company does (as did my previous employer). It's got a few rough edges, and a few annoying bugs, but it's a very usable wiki.
However, as noted above, anything is only as good as its content. Company wikis tend to be "write only", but definitely need a critical mass to get going.
Re: (Score:2)
Confluence can be used in vendor cloud or on your own servers:
https://www.atlassian.com/soft... [atlassian.com]
Drupal with lots of modules (Score:1)
we started 6/7 years ago with a wiki and 5 years ago moved to a drupal instalation with loads of modules.
Sound like Moodle might be a better fit (Score:1)
it can handle course materials in all common formats: documents, audio, video, etc.
Surprised nobody has mentioned it already.
Re: (Score:2)
Heck no. As someone forced to use Moodle by college it is hands down the crappiest e-learning platform I've ever had to deal with. Even worse than blackboard. All those other MOOC's do pretty well, and I happen to love the interface Udemy provides, but for heaven's sakes don't torture people with Moodle. The *ONLY* thing it has going for itself is that it's free.
MediaWiki: Install the Youtube Extension (Score:2)
There's plenty around. Here's one: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/... [mediawiki.org]
Ignore that advice about Confluence. That product is HARD to use imo. Mediawiki is way better.
BTW - New version of Mediawiki have a rich text editor built in. You probably want to turn that on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Making knowledge explicit (Score:5, Insightful)
The number one problem with wikis and all other systems that try to 'store' employee's knowledge is that it requires people to make their knowledge explicit.
In your daily life and in your work, many things (if not almost everything) you do is based on implicit knowledge. You implicitly know how stuff is done, but to describe the steps you take and the thought processes you have, takes a lot of time and energy of your employees/colleagues. And then of course there's also the issue of keeping the knowledge up-to-date. Adding it is one thing, but keeping it fresh and ensuring people update the explicit knowledge in the wiki, also takes time and energy. Especially in IT, because the way things work changes relatively often.
And last but not least, people are often not willing to make their knowledge explicit, because their implicit knowledge makes them valuable as an employee. Overall you could say that the intrinsic motivation for people to make their knowledge explicit is very low.
Many scientific papers have been written on this subject. I suggest you try to find some answers there, although they may not be easy to find.
Re: (Score:1)
Alternative CMS: Drupal (Score:2)
We've had a great success with an internal Drupal CMS instead. Web developer to put the company style on it and put the first few articles in, quick training session on Drupal for managers to cascade down to their departments.
I'll see your Drupal, and raise you one OpenAtrium (Score:2)
I'll see your Drupal and raise you one better: how about using Drupal/OpenAtrium [openatrium.com]?
You may recall the previous Presidential administration made headlines by replacing the Clinton administration's IBM/Lotus Notes Domino email/groupware [arstechnica.com] servers with MicrosoftExchange (and presumably SharePoint also, but I'm not gonna go there).
The current Presidential administration of course had to ditch that Microsoft crap as fast as it possibly could. Obviously, continuing to use it would become a political and legal liabili
Onenote or similar (Score:2)
At work IT uses Onenote notebooks for documentation. I never tried it for video, but we've had good luck for it with text/images. No programming knowledge needed, adequate search, OCR/search of text in images. You can sync the content using a file share or Sharepoint, and probably WebDAV. I understand it's cost-free for Windows and Mac. You get a web interface if you use Sharepoint, but I don't care for it. If you're a primarily Windows/Office shop it might be worth testing.
Why not.... (Score:2)
Wikis let anybody add and edit data. That is there strength and their weakness. That might be good in some situations, but probably not with business policies and the like. In a business setting, maybe something like Wordpress would suit your needs better as you can imbed multimedia in it. If you have more advanced needs, then maybe Drupal would work.
custom coding time (Score:2)
i wrote a video upload and playback system for a christian-based financial advice organisation that was uncomfortable with the idea of having youtube advertising messages in direct contravention of the advice that they were giving their clients.
the "normal" way to do what you are asking would be to simply have a plugin that allows you to specify the youtube URL, and it would be embedded... this is not very hard to do, and, if there is not something out there already, consider paying a programmer to do it.
Dozuki (Score:1)
Videos... (Score:3)
"Here are 20 videos detailing stupid procedures you need to go through to request access to customers' systems/networks/databases to even think about doing your job"
Access request procedures change very fast and are tedious to contribute updates to.
Videos have a high friction to update. Out of date docmentation is worse than no documentation at all.
Wikis have a low friction to update. Even the new hire can fix things as they execute the procedures.
I don't know why people would use videos, but then I also think that videos are terrible learning tools. But then, maybe it's just me, there are some strong visual learners out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Videos have a high friction to update. . . .
Wikis have a low friction to update. Even the new hire can fix things as they execute the procedures.
I don't know why people would use videos.
I agree, most things don't need a video. I well-written set of steps is usually enough.
Even so, if you do have some videos, and they're on Youtube, you just need a wiki that can support hyperlinks --- which is all wikis.
Not a Wiki (Score:2)
Confluence is heads and shoulders above the rest (Score:2)
I've been involved in many, many projects to share internal knowledge over the years. I had pretty much given up all hope on wiki technology until I got to the latest versions of Confluence, which strikes an excellent balance between flexibility, simplicity, and automation.
Doing the task you outlined (create multiple playlists of media files) could be done in a variety of ways: Create a "File List" page and upload your content, then create separate pages linking to them; create a page and attach the multime
Why the preference for video? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
Videos aren't easy things to produce, and properly producing them will take longer than writing them up.
That said, there is value in doing a video - it can be easier to show complex steps by doing it in a video that one can pause and rewind as well as show things like where you turn around the object rather than try to illustrate it.
However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have a text description, and you shouldn't have long videos - no more than a couple of minutes. If it's a long procedure, then h
Drupal (Score:1)
VIMP (Score:1)
Not a wiki, but it gives you that "internal YouTube" kinda thing: www.vimp.com [vimp.com]
Even has a freebie community edition [vimp.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Beware of the videos!! (Score:1)
I maintain my company's knowledge systems. Multimedia videos have several problems:
- They are not accessible to the hard of hearing or the vision-impaired.You may be breaking the law unless you invest the effort to caption every single video.
- They are hard to search. Unless you create transcripts/captions or extensively meta-tag the videos it's really hard to find specific content.
- They are not easy to update. Generally you have to reshoot and re-edit the entire video.
- They take a lot of time an
Confluence (Score:1)