Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeJan 20th 2011

    If a web is public-readable but only writeable via a password, then the public interface has the word “published” in place of the “show”. URLs ending in “show” are for people with the password (since they have the edit links and so forth). The wiki knows about this and inter-wiki links go to the right place.

    However, the forum does not know about this. The forum doesn’t have a list of which webs are private and which are public. It just does a plain-and-simple pattern replacement for wiki-links: anything of the form [[X:Y]] becomes a hyperlink to (with X = nLab if it is omitted). That’s why wiki-links to the publications web don”t work.

    It is possible to change this on an individual basis. For example, [[google:nlab]] links to a google search for nlab rather than to So I can (and will) fix it for the publications web - once it has stopped moving around!

    I can either do this for all the current published webs, or do it by request only. If no-one has any objections, I’ll do it for the current list. But I’ll wait a few days to see if anyone can think of a reason why this is a bad idea.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 20th 2011

    The existence of separate URLs /published and /show seems to me like an infelicity in instiki. If a web is public-readable password-writable, why not have /show URLs give the published version, with a “log in” link somewhere visible, and once people have entered the password, give them the editable version using the same URL?

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorRodMcGuire
    • CommentTimeJan 20th 2011

    an infelicity in instiki

    I can guess that the /published/ - /show/ distinction is used to generate 2 different pages and only the /show/ page has an Edit button. A better user-interface would only have a /show/ page where the Edit button (and maybe some other stuff) could be grayed-out to indicate login status, saying (also maybe with hover text) that you have to be logged in to use it.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeJan 20th 2011

    The point of not showing stuff on the “published” page is to that a web that is public but editing is restricted can function effectively as a normal website. It’s not intended to be obvious that it is a wiki. Of course, one can question the decision to design it thus, but that’s the reason it was designed that way.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 21st 2011

    I think plenty of “normal web sites” have an unobtrusive “log in” link not intended for the general public.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorRodMcGuire
    • CommentTimeJan 25th 2011

    a web that is public but editing is restricted can function effectively as a normal website.

    It turns out if you format things correctly, Google Scholar will think that a page is a scholarly article and index it.

    PZ Myers complained to Google that they were indexing Creationist literature as scholarly articles. Google replied that they don’t examine the intellectual content of what they index, but rely on some secret parsing to see if something looks like a research paper. Jen McCreight has found a term paper she wrote in high school in the Scholar index (and Google thinks her composition teacher is the 2nd author).

    So, if a /publication/ page is somehow formatted correctly and doesn’t look too much like a web page or blog posting, Google Scholar will index it. Maybe someone should set up a test /publication/ to see if Google will index it as being scholarly. (a lot of what is in GS is PDFs so it wouldn’t hurt to create one but GS does occasionally index HTMLs.)

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeJan 26th 2011

    Interesting, I wonder what the correct formatting is.