Thread:Talk:Sites using Semantic MediaWiki/Bullet lists of changes and suggestions

Although my starting point was the overview of digital humanities projects and websites, this brought me straight to revising the template used for websites (Template:SMW site). Rather than replacing it entirely, however, I thought it would be safer to start with a derivative template (Template:SMW site new) and form and use those for new additions. Changes include:


 * Short description is stored semantically.
 * Keywords are added to the form.
 * A navigational trail above the page title that allows site visitors to keep track of where they are and also to find out about other websites.
 * May includes a reference to overview pages like "wiki of the month" or "digital humanities"
 * In addition to sites using Semantic MediaWiki only, we may want to include a couple of websites with closely related software or shared origins such as Wikidata.
 * Some cosmetic changes.

Some structural changes that Karsten and I discussed are still underway:
 * Pages about websites (individual ones) will be moved to the Site namespace.
 * Template:SMW site will be renamed to Template:Site (and likewise the page form).
 * Overview pages are being looked into

Suggestions and comments

 * Perhaps add some broad classification: is the wiki commercial, non-profit or academic?
 * Add the names of organisations/institutions responsible for the wiki or wiki project? I'm primarily thinking of teams of developers or researchers (e.g. Kallimachos), publishers, commissioners and funders but not in any way that specifies or demarcates their roles semantically.
 * Keywords: right now we've got simple keyword tags. Standardisation would probably be overkill but curation could be helpful. Autocompletion with Page Forms remains to be done, btw.
 * We've got "cover image", which is usually either a logo or a screenshot (typically of the homepage). Should we not separate the two and have a logo in addition to a representative screenshot, one that speaks more to audiences than logos?
 * About the availability status of the wiki:
 * Re: defunct (1): some sites are still in existence but have exchanged MediaWiki for a different platform.
 * Re: defunct (2): should websites that are either not available or that have said goodbye to MediaWiki still be included in our overviews?
 * What about private wikis and wikis that are unavailable because they are in the process of being developed.
 * Based on the above, I'd suggest the following status groups: available, private/internal, not yet available, defunct, no longer a wiki (or perhaps merge the latter two into one).
 * Add main language(s) of the wiki? English, French, German, etc.

N.B. One thing I haven't taken into account (yet) is support for multiple languages.