Audiobus: Use your music apps together.

What is Audiobus?Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.

Download on the App Store

Audiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.

Creating Wiki Entries with correct tree structure?

edited May 6 in Knowledge Base

@McD created a directory page, I’ve decided to add my pages to the wiki starting from:
https://wiki.audiob.us/the_directory

At some point how to organize the wiki will be developed or people who use the wiki may have a hard time finding information and we might end up creating duplicate pages.

Listed below are my initial stumbling attempts to place pages correctly

I’ve already created some pages on the wiki that are not correctly placed🤷‍♂️. I will have to educated myself and fixed them so people can navigate the Wiki in a logical fashion.

I’ve created new pages which are linked to the new structure.

@Michael @LinearLineman The following pages were deleted using the wiki author tips:
https://wiki.audiob.us/complex_waves
https://wiki.audiob.us/animoog/timbre
https://wiki.audiob.us/animoog

Comments

  • edited May 5

    It might be useful for someone with some wiki entry experience to guide us in how we should setup our initial tree structure? Any volunteers?

    I have been kind of winging it by adding pages from this starting point:
    https://wiki.audiob.us/app_tutorials

    I’m open to suggestions or rearranging how the pages are setup.

  • @InfoCheck : was it @Michael that put up The Directory?

    For app tutorials, my feeling is that it would be best to have tutorials for apps linked to from an app or topic’s main wiki page. That way (at least for now), it simplifies finding knwledge. I,e, if I am looking for Patterning 2 knowledge, I’d love to be able to go to Patterning and see what knowledge there is including links to whatever tutorials exist for it.

    Anyway, that is how it seems to me at least until app/topic pages have so much content that it makes sense to split them up.

  • edited May 5

    @espiegel123 said:
    @InfoCheck : was it @Michael that put up The Directory?

    For app tutorials, my feeling is that it would be best to have tutorials for apps linked to from an app or topic’s main wiki page. That way (at least for now), it simplifies finding knwledge. I,e, if I am looking for Patterning 2 knowledge, I’d love to be able to go to Patterning and see what knowledge there is including links to whatever tutorials exist for it.

    Anyway, that is how it seems to me at least until app/topic pages have so much content that it makes sense to split them up.

    I believe that Michael did create The Directory page though I could be mistaken. At this point the current list of apps on https://wiki.audiob.us/apps is a work in progress IMHO.

    I’ll definitely try to educate myself about the tagging app for the wiki as I believe it could address a lot of the issues associated with how to find the same pages multiple ways and how to organize information multiple ways while minimizing a need to resort to database type options.

    At this point, I’m just adding content to a tree structure starting from the tutorials page to keep track of and to organize what I’m adding to the wiki. The way my entries are structured isn’t any sort of reflection of what the final or only structure should be. Once the structure of the wiki is more stabilized, I’d definitely add links so that people could easily look up an app by name and find tutorials and other information associated with it.

  • @InfoCheck : The Directory was not created by Michael as far as I can tell. There is a history for each page that shows its creation and revisions.

    I also feel like a page that is a static list of apps page is perhaps not the best way to tackle things. It feels long and difficult to manage. Much better to add pages as needed for apps.

    It seems like it might be worth spending some time working out some conventions and wiki structure before getting too far in the page creation process. I've managed a wiki where we goofed by not thinking about general structure and conventions early on -- which made it difficult to keep it organized once it scaled up. Re-organizing a lot of pages in Dokuwiki is a lot more work than getting a manageable long-term structure together before there is a lot of content.

    Sometimes one doesn't know what the "right" structure is until you have a lot of content, but I think in this case, we can probably come up with a good guess as to a workable structure.

  • edited May 5

    @espiegel123 said:
    @InfoCheck : The Directory was not created by Michael as far as I can tell. There is a history for each page that shows its creation and revisions.

    I also feel like a page that is a static list of apps page is perhaps not the best way to tackle things. It feels long and difficult to manage. Much better to add pages as needed for apps.

    It seems like it might be worth spending some time working out some conventions and wiki structure before getting too far in the page creation process. I've managed a wiki where we goofed by not thinking about general structure and conventions early on -- which made it difficult to keep it organized once it scaled up. Re-organizing a lot of pages in Dokuwiki is a lot more work than getting a manageable long-term structure together before there is a lot of content.

    Sometimes one doesn't know what the "right" structure is until you have a lot of content, but I think in this case, we can probably come up with a good guess as to a workable structure.

    I tend to think topics for the knowledge base should be heavily cross referenced as multiple people have multiple ways of looking at those topics. Perhaps a discussion about the most common ways of doing this with examples such as:

    1. Discussion around a specific app.
    2. Discussion around a type of synthesis
    3. Discussion around a type of workflow
    4. Discussion around music theory
    5. Discussion around connecting iOS to hardware and desktop systems.

    Individual pages can frequently fall under a number of these different sorts of perspectives and could ideally be found on the wiki using tags associated with a particular approach. The good thing about a user driven tag system is that it tends to be self regulating in terms of what’s of significance.

    The current forum is very linear and often there are divergent lines of thought in discussions which make it difficult to track what’s going on. The wiki would seem to have some tools for being able to overcome them.

    As a specific example, a YouTube video has a specific title and tags, but if you’re familiar with the content of the video and there’s some sort of agreement as to what sorts of organization we’ll support in the wiki, then we’ll know how to link it up to those.

    We’ll have to agree upon how to strike a balance between having some sort of standard approaches, the degree of their complexity, and above all how practical it will be to maintain and create pages under those self imposed guidelines.

    When people create tutorials, it’s because they’re very interested in achieving some specific goals which will be reflected in the contents of the tutorial and how you’d expect it to be classified. Perhaps allowing people to write pages and then organizing how to post those pages might be the most effective way to proceed as pages can always be reorganized but the core content may be less easily replaced. Having the content creators associate tags with the pages they produce could simplify how the wiki should be structured.

  • After a day of posting pages and learning that there’s a lot to learn about wikis, I’ll spend some significant time reading about how our particular wiki works and what options it has. Meanwhile, the more experienced wiki users will hopefully be able to take stock and some clear directions will start to emerge so my efforts and those of other can be redirected in a useful direction.

  • I think serious consideration of a tag system for pages in the wiki would be a viable way to resolve these sorts of issues rather than long lists or complicated databases.

  • FYI: I created "The Directory" and removed it until the issues around how to structure the
    site are resolved. A Directory that details the root level Namespaces is probably a good approach.

  • @McD said:
    FYI: I created "The Directory" and removed it until the issues around how to structure the
    site are resolved. A Directory that details the root level Namespaces is probably a good approach.

    Thank you for letting us know. I hope the level of interest in the wiki content will exceed the engagement with the discussion surrounding where the content should go.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @McD said:
    FYI: I created "The Directory" and removed it until the issues around how to structure the
    site are resolved. A Directory that details the root level Namespaces is probably a good approach.

    Thank you for letting us know. I hope the level of interest in the wiki content will exceed the engagement with the discussion surrounding where the content should go.

    I suspect it going to be had to recruit authors because it's not easy to write and the rewards are measured using the complete set of integers (positive and negative). But some with the skills and will might arrive and prove me wrong. I'd like that.

    Your work on the tutorials for major Apps is impressive. Perhaps it existed in the KB and I just never bothered to look and you're effectively moving it over.

    Here's a suggestion: Any text can become an instant Wiki Page by adding [[ ]]'s around it.
    The word [[timbre]] would be a page that could then be referred to in any page. I would
    create the page in the Wiki that's there now with more context like [[Animoog Timbre]] in case someone decided to add the common musical and audio engineering terms to the Wiki
    and wanted to write what [[timbre]] means as opposed to "Tim-burr" which would be totally off track OT.

    [["I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK."]]

  • @McD said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    @McD said:
    FYI: I created "The Directory" and removed it until the issues around how to structure the
    site are resolved. A Directory that details the root level Namespaces is probably a good approach.

    Thank you for letting us know. I hope the level of interest in the wiki content will exceed the engagement with the discussion surrounding where the content should go.

    I suspect it going to be had to recruit authors because it's not easy to write and the rewards are measured using the complete set of integers (positive and negative). But some with the skills and will might arrive and prove me wrong. I'd like that.

    Your work on the tutorials for major Apps is impressive. Perhaps it existed in the KB and I just never bothered to look and you're effectively moving it over.

    Here's a suggestion: Any text can become an instant Wiki Page by adding [[ ]]'s around it.
    The word [[timbre]] would be a page that could then be referred to in any page. I would
    create the page in the Wiki that's there now with more context like [[Animoog Timbre]] in case someone decided to add the common musical and audio engineering terms to the Wiki
    and wanted to write what [[timbre]] means as opposed to "Tim-burr" which would be totally off track OT.

    [["I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK."]]

    Thank you.

    I’m writing my page contributions in markdown which is much easier for me to use because my text editor supports it very well and allows me to preview it before submitting it. This means my mistakes largely are taken care of offline plus the online wiki editor can be very dicey and fidgety. I can then upload my page when it’s finished all from within my text editor like so:

  • I just want you and everyone to understand simply adding [[ ]] around text will create a link.
    Initially, to an empty page that can import content. This means you don't need to know some "tree based" path to a page. The Wiki manages that level of detail.

    What not clear to me is how this concept is applied across "NameSpaces" which might require using text references like [[Apps:Animoog]] or [[Tutorials:Animoog]] to 2 distinct
    "Animoog" pages. I suspect it works that way but (personally) I don't think it adds much for ease of use. But I can see that others prefer a logical organization of the data. I can learn new habits.

  • @McD said:
    I just want you and everyone to understand simply adding [[ ]] around text will create a link.
    Initially, to an empty page that can import content. This means you don't need to know some "tree based" path to a page. The Wiki manages that level of detail.

    What not clear to me is how this concept is applied across "NameSpaces" which might require using text references like [[Apps:Animoog]] or [[Tutorials:Animoog]] to 2 distinct
    "Animoog" pages. I suspect it works that way but (personally) I don't think it adds much for ease of use. But I can see that others prefer a logical organization of the data. I can learn new habits.

    The markup in markdown is different than for the wiki so the [[]] stuff is different.

    In posting pages, I’ve used a tree structure with cross references as that allows me to keep track of what I’m doing and to find things easily and build upon what’s already there. I have a structure that I’m building. After the pages are up there, people can certainly do with it whatever they want and rearrange those pages to suit their idea of what makes sense if they really wanted to.

    My impression is that wikis can be more like a bush than a tree as members of a community are simultaneously posting pages rather than having a hierarchical structure or single goal directing its construction. Members of the community expand their wiki in whatever direction they desire within the normative constraints of the community.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @McD said:
    I just want you and everyone to understand simply adding [[ ]] around text will create a link.
    Initially, to an empty page that can import content. This means you don't need to know some "tree based" path to a page. The Wiki manages that level of detail.

    What not clear to me is how this concept is applied across "NameSpaces" which might require using text references like [[Apps:Animoog]] or [[Tutorials:Animoog]] to 2 distinct
    "Animoog" pages. I suspect it works that way but (personally) I don't think it adds much for ease of use. But I can see that others prefer a logical organization of the data. I can learn new habits.

    The markup in markdown is different than for the wiki so the [[]] stuff is different.

    In posting pages, I’ve used a tree structure with cross references as that allows me to keep track of what I’m doing and to find things easily and build upon what’s already there. I have a structure that I’m building. After the pages are up there, people can certainly do with it whatever they want and rearrange those pages to suit their idea of what makes sense if they really wanted to.

    My impression is that wikis can be more like a bush than a tree as members of a community are simultaneously posting pages rather than having a hierarchical structure or single goal directing its construction. Members of the community expand their wiki in whatever direction they desire within the normative constraints of the community.

    I tested the Namespace syntax and made three pages called "the directory" in:

    the root namespace [[:the directory]]
    the playground namespace [[playground:the directory]]
    the sandbox namespace [[sandbox:the directory]]

    Visually to the reader they just show "the directory" colored to indicate they are links.

    So, you can use [[timbre]] and I can create a new page with that name in another namespace. And we can reference each other's timbre pages by being explicit for the
    Namespace being used. That's great.

    I can see why you might want to use a more capable editor to generate Markdown.
    The time spent in a complex editor re-maps your brain to think differently.

    I just avoid Markdown as a rule and type with about 1 defect per 100 words.
    With a Wiki someone that's annoyed can fix egregious errors.

Sign In or Register to comment.