So, several years ago, everyone was tasked to do their own "final research". Something that will be presented to their peers, as their "parting message" before leaving this academy.
I choose a topic about "library". I thought that it would be cool if we identify "the entities within the library", such as "topics", "concepts", "documents", "individual writer", "publishers". Based on the information contained in the books, we could details each entities, and connect interrelated entities together. So, relationship like "this document is discussing about that topic", or "this writer usually writes this topic", could be explicitly represented.
Month later into the research process.. Delving about "knowledge management", "ontologies", "knowledge-graph", etc, etc. Designing the application that could store that interrelationships, etc, etc. Somehow, this application is resembling the already-existing technology : wiki.
Why wiki? Well. You can create a page, and you can link it together. As simple as that. So whatever the "entities" is, you can make a wiki page for each entity, detail it out, and link it to other entities.
Now i come into full circle. After years of research, i just "rediscovering" wiki. Can i just tell them blatantly "yep. Just use wiki for your library"? The wiki is already there, since a long time ago. I've tried to modify it, so at least, i could contribute something new. But in the end, it is still a wiki.
Should i cancel it entirely, start with new research topics, start from ground zero again.....?
I can't lie to my readers. I can't do something like creating hundred pages of report, flavoring it with a lot of complex jargons, buzzwords, and long list of references to obscure journals, trying to convince everyone that this report is indeed a quality research, when i could simply phrase my whole research on a single sentence "use a wiki to store information about library (book, writer, topic, and their interrelationship)".
If they can't accept this. At least, i already publish it here. haha..~