Hi Ice,

Welcome to the forum!

I'm sure you'll enjoy the results, and not look back.

Cheers,

ast

Quote from: leepw on February 04, 2008, 10:00 PM
Guess what I'll be having for diner tomorrow?

...and the next day, and the day after that, and.... ;D

Welcome to the forum, Lee.  I'm sure you'll find something here that'll work well for you.  Be sure to keep us posted on your progress.

Happy currying,

ast

Quote from: dmac296 on February 04, 2008, 10:59 PM
Hi all, joined Friday and been trying to find my way round the site.
Made the saffron base on sunday, smells great, but used the first recipe before it was amended. Any ideas on salvaging it? apart from adding another 1.5 kilo of onions.
Would leaving out the tumeric,corriander,and cumin from the second stage of curry work or do you need the fresh spices to get the authentic taste?
Thanks in advance

Welcome to the forum dmac!

If you joined on Friday, I wouldn't fret too much about the base.  I made it from the version you did and had fantastic results.  Just keep going and tell us how you get on with your recipes--and be sure to take a photo or two!

Happy currying,

ast

P.S.  The original version is the only one with minor problems, but "original" in this sense is from well before you would've seen it.  Yours should be just fine.

Depending on what kind of access restrictions to the recipes we want, e.g. do we keep the same model as here that requires free registration, mediawiki may not be the right answer.  It wasn't designed for that type of functionality, although it is currently being added.

More info here:  http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Security_issues_with_authorization_extensions

This page on the mediawiki wiki, http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MoinMoin, mentions another wiki package used by the Ubuntu Linux distro help system  that does provide access control lists.

Before we go choosing software, it might be better to agree on what the essential things we're trying to do, e.g. access control requirements, review process, and the types of jobs we think are most important.  Maybe these are finding recipes known to work with a given base, reading reviews of the recipe and seeing a x/5 star rating for the recipe to help choose the right one.

We don't need an exhaustive list, but I do think some agreement on what capabilities we're really trying to provide over and above the existing cr0 functionality is necessary before anyone goes and installs software.  I almost slipped down the "dark path" last night and went hunting too, but that's not the right way to go about something like this.

What are everyone else's thoughts?

ast

Quote from: Bobby Bhuna on February 03, 2008, 07:05 PM
As usual Ast, some very good points.

Thanks mate.  I think we're thinking along the same lines.

Quote
I would say that if we could firstly come up with the sections we want, e.g. starters, mains, etc. then the dishes we want to for these sections, we would have a good starting point. Once that was finalised, we could choose the base that we use by default and so on, so that all of this is dealt with before we put pen to paper so to speak.

Yeah, but the guts of that is already here.  The only things missing are direct categorizations by  ingredients, authors and potentially a rating/feedback system so people can both post comments and ratings.  The risk there is that the comments end up being a forum, so I'm not sure what the best compromise is.  I do think having every recipe have a rating score automatically would be a good idea though.  The forum could then be used for what it does best--discussion and commentary. 

Ideally, there'd be Amazon-like reviews and ratings and an automatic link to a forum topic for open discussion about the recipe.  Updates would be done directly using whatever means were provided by the software and subject to whatever review process would make sense.

Quote
Also things like default recipe layout on the page etc. etc. Once all this was ready I think we could come up with something 10 times more convenient, efficient and intuitive than the current way we look up recipes. Remember what we're looking for when trying to find recipes is like a dynamic online cook book - not a place for open discussion.

I think whatever it is, the layout should be something that we can tweak.  I'm sure the underlying content system has support for this, though, so it's just a matter of getting it done.

I do think "cr0 Currypedia" might be a better choice than "Crokipedia" as the connotations of the beginning sound probably aren't going to reinforce the impression we're driving for.

To be clear:  the idea is to figure out the best way to augment and enhance the offering of cr0, not to replace it with something else.  Just in case anyone was thinking otherwise.

Cheers,

ast

Looking at the recipes on here a second time, I guess I was more influenced by the ingredient list of CK's bhuna than the others.  Regarding the consistency, I'd have thought that it'd be the other way around based on the jalfrezi's I've eaten.  They haven't struck me as particularly dry as I recall.

I'll be back in town more regularly in the next couple of months, so I'll be closer to the real deal.  I'll start exploring various places' take on the two and see if it jives with your own experience.

Cheers for the response.

ast

Hiya Bobby,

Yeah, I read it.  Was doing a bit of surfing around and found a couple of interesting sites.  This one's built using a wiki, http://www.goonswithspoons.com/, and I think it's a pretty good example of using the medium for what we're talking about.

This one's also pretty interesting, but it's based on a blog, http://www.elise.com/recipes/archives/002033buttermilk_fried_chicken.php.  It's also quite nice in terms of the underlying structure.  Since you've mentioned CSS, you know as well as me that pimping it is a separate process to creating the underlying content...

I'm not so sure I agree with you about not trying to ensure some standards for the wiki (if developed).  To me, the wiki could well be the "living" version of the book, therefore it should have similar standards.  Wikipedia's actually quite hit-and-miss, depending on the topics you're trying to find, and there's a wide variety of approaches being used.  For something on BIR, your sample space is going to be a lot smaller, and I'm not convinced about the evolution over time working out the way you say.

The main reason I say this is because I think most people here who could contribute to the wiki have already made their own customized/adapted versions of things that they're happy with.  They've learned to live with the forum the way it is, and that's ok.  The problem is that this "learning curve" is somewhat short, but it's repeated ever time someone joins the forum.  I'm sure most veterans don't even think twice about it now.

Not sure what the answer is, but I do think there's merit in trying to establish initially high standards for the wiki/blog/whatever as well as for something else that may or may not be the same content published as an ebook.

I'm interested in hearing Stew, CA and CK's views on the subject as they've obviously been here longer than us. ;D

Whaddya think, guys?

ast

Hi UB,

As I said on the other thread, I think it's a good idea.  However, I think that considerable editorial effort would be needed to make it a top-notch product and accurately represent the knowledge and quality of the recipes here.

I also think it would need to have more than just recipes.  There'd need to be at least some discussion of the various cooking techniques and other things that go into BIR food.

Even if everyone helped by contributing revised and new content, there'd still need to be an editorial team to stitch it together.  There's also the QA/QC aspect of the book:  how accessible will it be to people who've never tried this before, or who have had less than stellar results from other sources that we're all familiar with?  Who's willing to try all of the recipes - as written in the book - to make sure they fit together nicely and have notes on how to adjust them for various bases or other factors?

To me, this sort of thing is the difference between a complete work and what we have now.  What we have now is something you can approach without any expectations of polish.  It's more "rough and ready", and that's great for what the site is today.  I don't think it would work as an e-book or even Bobby's wiki idea.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for doing something, and I'd be willing to help as much as I could--time permitting.  I just think it could easily end up being a bit half-baked if there wasn't enough commitment to see it through to a stopping point.

I'm sure that the latest e-book didn't go through this sort of process, but I think we should be trying to do much better than the competition rather than just follow their lead except for charging for the content.  Maybe other people feel differently, though.

Cheers,

ast

I'm sure this is a pretty dumb question, but here goes...

I've never eaten or seen a bhuna except in the pictures on this site, but I have eaten a few real restaurant jalfrezis, so I'm familiar-ish with what they're supposed to be like.  Looking at the response to CK's bhuna recipe and subsequently going through the rest of the ones on the site, it looks like the ingredients and cooking methods are nearly interchangeable.  Is the only real difference that you should use less base for a bhuna and maybe nix the lemon juice/sour accent?

I've read the "unofficial" histories of both dishes on the Web in a few places, and know that bhuna's really a cooking style and jalfrezi was originally an extremely dry stir-fry used to gussy up leftovers much the same way as the original recipes for gumbo do.  However, history doesn't really seem to translate well to the modern BIR, so any insights would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance,

ast

Welcome!

Don't be afraid to just jump right in and have a go.  If you have any questions, just give a shout.  Lots of people here willing to help out.

Cheers,

ast