Talk:Archiving - Revision history

Jsummers: Undo revision 34382 by Jsummers (talk)

2020-01-15T19:08:10Z

Undo revision 34382 by Jsummers (talk)

Jsummers: /* Disk compression */ new section

2020-01-15T19:07:07Z

‎Disk compression: new section

Gphemsley: /* Revisitation */ Another thing

2012-11-30T18:40:22Z

‎Revisitation: Another thing

Gphemsley: /* Revisitation */ Reply

2012-11-30T18:39:17Z

‎Revisitation: Reply

Gphemsley: Gphemsley moved page Talk:Compression to Talk:Archiving: Splitting Archiving and Compression.

2012-11-30T18:30:36Z

Gphemsley moved page Talk:Compression to Talk:Archiving: Splitting Archiving and Compression.

Dan Tobias at 22:05, 29 November 2012

2012-11-29T22:05:53Z

Gphemsley: /* Categories */ reply

2012-11-29T17:54:02Z

‎Categories: reply

Dan Tobias: /* Categories */

2012-11-29T17:46:54Z

‎Categories

Gphemsley: Time to revisit this.

2012-11-29T17:32:58Z

Time to revisit this.

Jason Scott at 05:13, 1 November 2012

2012-11-01T05:13:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:08, 15 January 2020
Line 17:		Line 17:
	::::Done. But now I wonder if maybe [[Archiving]] shouldn't also have a [[Compression]] subcategory? I'm not sure how we want the sub-ontology to work. (If we only have [[Compression]] as a subcategory, then the archive formats without compression would be at a higher level; they'd be leaves off the root instead of leaves off a branch.) Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)		::::Done. But now I wonder if maybe [[Archiving]] shouldn't also have a [[Compression]] subcategory? I'm not sure how we want the sub-ontology to work. (If we only have [[Compression]] as a subcategory, then the archive formats without compression would be at a higher level; they'd be leaves off the root instead of leaves off a branch.) Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
	::::Oh, also, somebody needs to go through all the archive formats and change their infobox from [[Compression]] to [[Archiving]]. (Does anybody have any bots set up?) [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)		::::Oh, also, somebody needs to go through all the archive formats and change their infobox from [[Compression]] to [[Archiving]]. (Does anybody have any bots set up?) [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
−
−	~~== Disk compression ==~~
−
−	Putting disk-level transparent compression formats here arguably contradicts the "Stream compression formats" text. But I don't see a better place to put them -- I guess I want this page to be for "all compression topics that don't belong somewhere else". -[[User:Jsummers\|Jsummers]] ([[User talk:Jsummers\|talk]]) 19:07, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:07, 15 January 2020
Line 17:		Line 17:
	::::Done. But now I wonder if maybe [[Archiving]] shouldn't also have a [[Compression]] subcategory? I'm not sure how we want the sub-ontology to work. (If we only have [[Compression]] as a subcategory, then the archive formats without compression would be at a higher level; they'd be leaves off the root instead of leaves off a branch.) Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)		::::Done. But now I wonder if maybe [[Archiving]] shouldn't also have a [[Compression]] subcategory? I'm not sure how we want the sub-ontology to work. (If we only have [[Compression]] as a subcategory, then the archive formats without compression would be at a higher level; they'd be leaves off the root instead of leaves off a branch.) Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
	::::Oh, also, somebody needs to go through all the archive formats and change their infobox from [[Compression]] to [[Archiving]]. (Does anybody have any bots set up?) [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)		::::Oh, also, somebody needs to go through all the archive formats and change their infobox from [[Compression]] to [[Archiving]]. (Does anybody have any bots set up?) [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Disk compression ==
		+
		+	Putting disk-level transparent compression formats here arguably contradicts the "Stream compression formats" text. But I don't see a better place to put them -- I guess I want this page to be for "all compression topics that don't belong somewhere else". -[[User:Jsummers\|Jsummers]] ([[User talk:Jsummers\|talk]]) 19:07, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:40, 30 November 2012
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:::That makes sense, I think. [[Archiving]] maybe. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 22:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)		:::That makes sense, I think. [[Archiving]] maybe. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 22:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
	::::Done. But now I wonder if maybe [[Archiving]] shouldn't also have a [[Compression]] subcategory? I'm not sure how we want the sub-ontology to work. (If we only have [[Compression]] as a subcategory, then the archive formats without compression would be at a higher level; they'd be leaves off the root instead of leaves off a branch.) Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)		::::Done. But now I wonder if maybe [[Archiving]] shouldn't also have a [[Compression]] subcategory? I'm not sure how we want the sub-ontology to work. (If we only have [[Compression]] as a subcategory, then the archive formats without compression would be at a higher level; they'd be leaves off the root instead of leaves off a branch.) Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
		+	::::Oh, also, somebody needs to go through all the archive formats and change their infobox from [[Compression]] to [[Archiving]]. (Does anybody have any bots set up?) [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:39, 30 November 2012
Line 15:		Line 15:
	::That's one approach to consider. But there are a number of compression formats/algorithms (including [[gzip]] and [[bzip2]]) which in and of themselves have nothing to do with archiving. I wonder if a better approach wouldn't be to group archive formats (whether are not they are compressed) separately from simple compression formats/algorithms? This would mean moving the current [[Compression]] page to [[Archives]] or [[Archive formats]] or something, and then moving that stream compression section back over the redirect to [[Compression]]. Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 17:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)		::That's one approach to consider. But there are a number of compression formats/algorithms (including [[gzip]] and [[bzip2]]) which in and of themselves have nothing to do with archiving. I wonder if a better approach wouldn't be to group archive formats (whether are not they are compressed) separately from simple compression formats/algorithms? This would mean moving the current [[Compression]] page to [[Archives]] or [[Archive formats]] or something, and then moving that stream compression section back over the redirect to [[Compression]]. Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 17:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
	:::That makes sense, I think. [[Archiving]] maybe. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 22:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)		:::That makes sense, I think. [[Archiving]] maybe. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 22:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
		+	::::Done. But now I wonder if maybe [[Archiving]] shouldn't also have a [[Compression]] subcategory? I'm not sure how we want the sub-ontology to work. (If we only have [[Compression]] as a subcategory, then the archive formats without compression would be at a higher level; they'd be leaves off the root instead of leaves off a branch.) Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:05, 29 November 2012
Line 14:		Line 14:
	:Maybe the category should be "Compression and Archiving"? With separate category menus, it would be difficult to figure out where to put the combined archiving/compression formats. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 17:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)		:Maybe the category should be "Compression and Archiving"? With separate category menus, it would be difficult to figure out where to put the combined archiving/compression formats. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 17:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
	::That's one approach to consider. But there are a number of compression formats/algorithms (including [[gzip]] and [[bzip2]]) which in and of themselves have nothing to do with archiving. I wonder if a better approach wouldn't be to group archive formats (whether are not they are compressed) separately from simple compression formats/algorithms? This would mean moving the current [[Compression]] page to [[Archives]] or [[Archive formats]] or something, and then moving that stream compression section back over the redirect to [[Compression]]. Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 17:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)		::That's one approach to consider. But there are a number of compression formats/algorithms (including [[gzip]] and [[bzip2]]) which in and of themselves have nothing to do with archiving. I wonder if a better approach wouldn't be to group archive formats (whether are not they are compressed) separately from simple compression formats/algorithms? This would mean moving the current [[Compression]] page to [[Archives]] or [[Archive formats]] or something, and then moving that stream compression section back over the redirect to [[Compression]]. Thoughts? [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 17:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
		+	:::That makes sense, I think. [[Archiving]] maybe. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 22:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ::I concur that there's a real benefit to begin making a Categories approach to these items, so that as we mess with the core ontology, the Categories will take over. There's some extensions to automatically make Category pages - I'll make sure that's in place and we'll have a category piece as well, which will make finding things easier. --[[User:Jason Scott|Jason Scott]] ([[User talk:Jason Scott|talk]]) 05:13, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
-:A lot has changed over the course of the past month. Categories have been introduced alongside infoboxes. But this page (and its related categories) still conflates archive formats and compression formats. In general, there will be three types of formats: archive formats, compression formats, and combined archive and compression formats. (Running an archive format through a compressor is not the same as the third category.) We should probably take the opportunity to begin splitting these out somehow. [[User:Gphemsley|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley|talk]]) 17:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
+=== Revisitation ===
-::Maybe the category should be "Compression and Archiving"? With separate category menus, it would be difficult to figure out where to put the combined archiving/compression formats. [[User:Dan Tobias|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias|talk]]) 17:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:46, 29 November 2012
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:A lot has changed over the course of the past month. Categories have been introduced alongside infoboxes. But this page (and its related categories) still conflates archive formats and compression formats. In general, there will be three types of formats: archive formats, compression formats, and combined archive and compression formats. (Running an archive format through a compressor is not the same as the third category.) We should probably take the opportunity to begin splitting these out somehow. [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 17:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)		:A lot has changed over the course of the past month. Categories have been introduced alongside infoboxes. But this page (and its related categories) still conflates archive formats and compression formats. In general, there will be three types of formats: archive formats, compression formats, and combined archive and compression formats. (Running an archive format through a compressor is not the same as the third category.) We should probably take the opportunity to begin splitting these out somehow. [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 17:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
		+	::Maybe the category should be "Compression and Archiving"? With separate category menus, it would be difficult to figure out where to put the combined archiving/compression formats. [[User:Dan Tobias\|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias\|talk]]) 17:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:32, 29 November 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+
		+	== Categories ==
	I was about to create a separate category for 'container' formats, but thought I would check here just in case someone had lumped them under compression. Which is what has happened. Having a 'non-compressed' category under the 'compression' category demonstrates the folly of this approach, I think!		I was about to create a separate category for 'container' formats, but thought I would check here just in case someone had lumped them under compression. Which is what has happened. Having a 'non-compressed' category under the 'compression' category demonstrates the folly of this approach, I think!

Line 6:		Line 8:

	::I concur that there's a real benefit to begin making a Categories approach to these items, so that as we mess with the core ontology, the Categories will take over. There's some extensions to automatically make Category pages - I'll make sure that's in place and we'll have a category piece as well, which will make finding things easier. --[[User:Jason Scott\|Jason Scott]] ([[User talk:Jason Scott\|talk]]) 05:13, 1 November 2012 (UTC)		::I concur that there's a real benefit to begin making a Categories approach to these items, so that as we mess with the core ontology, the Categories will take over. There's some extensions to automatically make Category pages - I'll make sure that's in place and we'll have a category piece as well, which will make finding things easier. --[[User:Jason Scott\|Jason Scott]] ([[User talk:Jason Scott\|talk]]) 05:13, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
		+
		+	:A lot has changed over the course of the past month. Categories have been introduced alongside infoboxes. But this page (and its related categories) still conflates archive formats and compression formats. In general, there will be three types of formats: archive formats, compression formats, and combined archive and compression formats. (Running an archive format through a compressor is not the same as the third category.) We should probably take the opportunity to begin splitting these out somehow. [[User:Gphemsley\|Gphemsley]] ([[User talk:Gphemsley\|talk]]) 17:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:13, 1 November 2012
Line 4:		Line 4:

	: The seed for this page came from a gigantic list; the categories represent only a few minutes of sortation effort. I am strongly in favor of using actual mediawiki categories. [[User:Chronomex\|Chronomex]] ([[User talk:Chronomex\|talk]]) 05:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)		: The seed for this page came from a gigantic list; the categories represent only a few minutes of sortation effort. I am strongly in favor of using actual mediawiki categories. [[User:Chronomex\|Chronomex]] ([[User talk:Chronomex\|talk]]) 05:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
		+
		+	::I concur that there's a real benefit to begin making a Categories approach to these items, so that as we mess with the core ontology, the Categories will take over. There's some extensions to automatically make Category pages - I'll make sure that's in place and we'll have a category piece as well, which will make finding things easier. --[[User:Jason Scott\|Jason Scott]] ([[User talk:Jason Scott\|talk]]) 05:13, 1 November 2012 (UTC)