Automated Wiki Update Process
Original Publication Date: 2008-Dec-09
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2008-Dec-09
The Internet has made possible powerful collaboration environments that allow collaborative authoring of virtually any kind of information, with wikis being the most famous example to-date. The problems surfacing in collaborative editing of wikis will be the same problems that any collaborative authoring environment will face. This invention provides a richer environment for processing wiki changes that automates the privileges of editing based on community review, rather than the review and subsequent edits of individuals. Anyone can propose a change to the wiki (just as anyone can change most wikis today), but that change would then be voted upon by the community. When the support for the change exceeds a specified threshold, it can be accepted as a change to the wiki. Over time, a submitter's success might be taken into account as conferring an expert status on that submitter, lowering the threshold for acceptance of future changes. Likewise, those submitters whose changes are regularly rejected by the community might find future changes require more support for acceptance. In addition, other means of scoring the proposed edit are also possible within the scope of this invention.
Automated Wiki Update Process
Wikis are an extremely powerful way of creating and maintaining information, almost like a group word processor that allows many authors to contribute to a document. The most famous example, Wikipedia.org, is one of the most popular Web sites in the world, owing to its breadth of subject matter and to the accuracy of its content. That accuracy, however, is enforced by brute force--each change to the wiki must be reviewed by others for accuracy. If an erroneous change is made, it is left to others to correct the information, causing some information to be inaccurate all the time,
Overall, this system works well, but it is quite labor intensive and quite contentious. Changes can go back and forth based on the whims of just a few contributors. Each contributor develops a reputation for accuracy within small communities surrounding wikis or subject matter within wikis, but otherwise there is little distinction between experts those making their first foray into editing a wiki. Their ability to edit a wiki is largely the same, but they might suffer different fates by human editors and readers who pass judgment on their work. Every change to the wiki must be manually reviewed for accuracy by someone, regardless of the submitter and anyone passing judgment can make a change.
The invention provides a collaborative authoring space with an automated facility for determining if a given document or edit to a document is valued on one or more characteristics (such as correctness). Assume that the collaborative authoring space (such as but not limited to a wiki) allows each author to view each contribution by other authors, where contributions may be entire documents or specific revisions to a document, the invention calculates the value of each contribution based on the author's history of previous ratings. A sample end to end process could appear as follows.
Content is created in the Wiki.
Users would like to change said content
User makes proposed change to the content.
The changes are voted on by the community
When the change rises above the threshold level it become becomes vetted and
applied to the content.
The core components of the invention are:
A collaborative authoring environment
A mechanism for collecting and storing feedback metrics on edits and content
A persona system that ties feedback to the users/authors.
A system that stores and executes evaluation rules that determine when an edit become vetted and applied to the content.
One embodiment of the invention is as follows:
A wiki as a collaborative authoring environment.
A mechanism for collecting and storing feedback metrics on edits and content. This system is a typically a database with user selectable metric on th...