<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Britannica tweaks the wiki</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.everythingismiscellaneous.com/2008/06/10/britannica-tweaks-the-wiki/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.everythingismiscellaneous.com/2008/06/10/britannica-tweaks-the-wiki/</link>
	<description>About David Weinberger's book (May, 2007) and how we're pulling ourselves together now that we've blown ourselves to bits</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:37:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.everythingismiscellaneous.com/2008/06/10/britannica-tweaks-the-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-64529</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:44:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/?p=6873#comment-64529</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m trying to make a wiki-like travelguide for backpackers, and it&#039;s been tried like 20 times already with a straightforward wiki - none of them create travelguide content that seems good enough to actually travel with, backpack style, including wikitravel, which is the most popular. 

So I&#039;m playing with structure (enter hostel information in a more structured way), which gives great possibilities in the UI, and with editing process (anyone can edit anything, but there are subtleties there that need to evolve, like editing for style, ...). 

Anyways, yes, many possible systems of collaborative content creation :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m trying to make a wiki-like travelguide for backpackers, and it&#8217;s been tried like 20 times already with a straightforward wiki &#8211; none of them create travelguide content that seems good enough to actually travel with, backpack style, including wikitravel, which is the most popular. </p>
<p>So I&#8217;m playing with structure (enter hostel information in a more structured way), which gives great possibilities in the UI, and with editing process (anyone can edit anything, but there are subtleties there that need to evolve, like editing for style, &#8230;). </p>
<p>Anyways, yes, many possible systems of collaborative content creation :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Van Dijck&#8217;s Guide to Ease &#187; Blog Archive</title>
		<link>http://www.everythingismiscellaneous.com/2008/06/10/britannica-tweaks-the-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-64528</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Van Dijck&#8217;s Guide to Ease &#187; Blog Archive</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:39:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/?p=6873#comment-64528</guid>
		<description>[...] &#8220;We need lots of variations on the theme of collaboration. Editing adds value, as does expertise.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &#8220;We need lots of variations on the theme of collaboration. Editing adds value, as does expertise.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: W Power</title>
		<link>http://www.everythingismiscellaneous.com/2008/06/10/britannica-tweaks-the-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-64466</link>
		<dc:creator>W Power</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:58:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/?p=6873#comment-64466</guid>
		<description>It is interesting that Encyclopaedia Britannica has decided to follow in Wikipedia’s footsteps.
 
Britannica never thought that an open source product like Wikipedia would seriously challenge the credibility of its brand. They were wrong and Encyclopaedia Britannica&#039;s staff seriously misread the global market. They are now very concerned about the widespread use of a free Wikipedia vs their paid subscription model From a corporate perspective, Encyclopaedia Britannica is in serious trouble.
 
It will be interesting to see if Encyclopaedia Britannica survives.
It is the combination of a) the success of Wikipedia and b) improved search engines that has put financial pressure on Encyclopedia Britannica over recent years. Many libraries, schools &amp; individuals are questioning the need to pay to subscribe to Encyclopaedia Britannica when the content is free on the internet, and often much more comprehensive.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is interesting that Encyclopaedia Britannica has decided to follow in Wikipedia’s footsteps.</p>
<p>Britannica never thought that an open source product like Wikipedia would seriously challenge the credibility of its brand. They were wrong and Encyclopaedia Britannica&#8217;s staff seriously misread the global market. They are now very concerned about the widespread use of a free Wikipedia vs their paid subscription model From a corporate perspective, Encyclopaedia Britannica is in serious trouble.</p>
<p>It will be interesting to see if Encyclopaedia Britannica survives.<br />
It is the combination of a) the success of Wikipedia and b) improved search engines that has put financial pressure on Encyclopedia Britannica over recent years. Many libraries, schools &amp; individuals are questioning the need to pay to subscribe to Encyclopaedia Britannica when the content is free on the internet, and often much more comprehensive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
