ThreadMode and DocumentMode often share a same context. In WhyWikiWorksNot, one correctly notes the danger of switching ''too early'' from the one to the other. Is this an implication that while maturing, a context --an issue-- gets through several states? I believe that the problem is not that a state change would be ''premature'' at any moment, but that it should be reversible. The two states are different aspects of the handling of the issue. Whether one is more adapted than the other depends less upon what has been said so far, than upon what is felt to be missing. And this feeling cannot be shared: at least it is not expressed in words, it is not explicit!

Now, the two treatments of the same context should not be available ''flat'', as two arbitrarily different pages, because in that case, they will diverge. The commonality of contents between them will end in pure duplication. They should be seen as ''versions'' of the same elements, alternatives only one of which can be met in one view (i.e. software configuration). Of course, breaking down must be possible at any time, allowing to switch views.

One practical issue with DocumentMode is whether it should really avoid to UseSignatures. At best, it must be shared, the result of refinement and collaboration, and invite anyone to contribute: it must thus  refute any sense of ownership, and thus avoid signatures. But on the other hand, this doesn't mean that the initial contributions shouldn't be traceable, that there shouldn't be a way to get back to the genesis of the consensus. In linguistics, this would relate to the synchronic and diachronic views of language (FerdinandDeSaussure).

--MarcGirod

From ChangeManagementAppliedToWiki

----
CategoryWiki