this idea is awesome. The "forking" idea is great for recipes, but you need almost something like a difftool to be able to tell what's different and why? I think with a better UI and way's for users to interact with each other this could be extremely cool. Stick with it and good luck :)
+1 on a diff-tool. Its very hard to tell what's different between the forked recipes. Some sort of short commit-style message on the change would be helpful. (Something like "Added potatoes and carrots" or "Smoked the chicken instead of grilling it")
I really like the idea, but as others have mentioned, it does need some design help.
There actually is a really basic diff tool right now (Click on revisions on the recipe page). I'm working on creating a more advanced one now. Any ideas on what a good interface might be?
A diff visualization for ingredients should be pretty easy, you could show left and right and the delta between them as three distinct columns.
As for other distinctions, such as "mince" instead of "dice", that would be tricker, but you could probably do that with a human-friendly strikethrough coupled with a handwriting typeface to indicate what was changed.
Neat. When I saw the headline I thought that this would be too technical to get traction with non-geeks but it looks nice and I could see it becoming popular especially with particular diet communities like paleo etc.
Interesting application of software development paradigms to cooking. I think it would be useful to have categories, e.g. breakfast/dinner/dessert, hot/cold, and suchlike. And maybe a regular 'featured menu' on the front page to illustrate a meal combination, with a nice photograph shown and some encouraging body text.
Why not use github Pages and scrape the github repository for necessary data? It's all harmless recipe stuff anyway. Non-github users could be asked to use e-mail to place recipes, and can be informed that they can use markdown. Or even present a web form that sends an encrypted e-mail for them, employing that wicked JS textarea enhancer we saw the other day, for markdown syntax or even allow haml.
The github haml pages can have links station'd at the top or bottom to pre-fetch categories, previous, and next pages. The github Page Index can include a JS that builds the UI of the site via DOM manipulation, based on a lightweight Web app hosted elsewhere and called in via ajax.
You need to hire a designer for this. Cooking/recipes/food markets are really visually driven. You also need to define what a fork is right on the landing page. A fork for a cook is not the same as a fork for a programmer. What you should have is a good header area that has the application work flow explained in graphics.
Example:
Alice liked Juan's recide for thai rice.
She wanted to create her own version. Alice
forked Juan's recipe and modified it to fit
tastes.
In forkingrecipes, the act of forking is when
you give someone else's recipe your own touch.
Thus creating a new recipe for others to use and fork.
I know a good designer who can help you with this, by the way.
I'd like to second this, and also say that you should really work hard to establish "fork" and "forking" in contexts that make sense to non-developers. They're second nature for us, but non-technical cooks will probably either read it as "fucking recipes", or conflate fork (to diverge) with fork (eating utensil).
Hi, I am part of ForkTheCookbook [0]. We actually actively face this problem, which is why in our FAQ, the 2nd question tries to answer that: http://forkthecookbook.com/faq
Country indicates where a domain is registered | US/AUS
Popularity indicates how many visitors a website gets | Not very popular
E-mail indicates our overall opinion of a website's e-mail practices | We don't spam
Downloads indicates our overall opinion of a website's downloadable files | No file downloads
Online Affiliations indicates our overall opinion of a website's linking practices | We vet every link. Every write up. It could be one of our authors are having a malware issue. Not sure about that.
Annoyances indicates our overall opinion of a website's pop-up practices. | No popup.
Exploits are rare but extremely dangerous security threats caused by a website "exploiting" a security vulnerability in the browser. | Don't think we have exploits. Something to check
Web reputation McAfee tests websites for web reputation using the TrustedSource™ system. | Totally not helpful
Reviewer and Site Owner Comments | I see no reviews
Hey, if you have played around with the website, you'd notice a lot of forks. We spent about 3 months convincing people forking was a good thing before finally launching it.
If you wish to know more, contact us at admin[at]forkthecookbook.com . Sorry for this, as half of us are terribly ill, and we take turns to answer questions
I really like this! Hopefully it gains momentum because it'd be really neat to have [a tool that can be used as] a crowd-sourced recipe-optimiser.
On a different note, I'm on a slow internet connection and it's very noticeable that the page is huge and not optimised for bandwidth (some thumbnailing and gzip-ing would be good to add at some point, to make the site as snappy as possible! :) ).
https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights#url=h...
I agree with the other commenters: great idea, but needs a designer.
By the way, are you based in Chicago? I met somebody at the Chicago HN meetup last year who was talking about building this exact idea, and I loved the idea back then too. Are you that person by chance?
I just bookmarked a couple of recipes. It would be nice if the default name when saving as a favorite included the name of the recipe rather than the name of the site (particularly for those who want to bookmark more than one recipe). Think you probably just have to make the "<title>" include the recipe name.
I just bookmarked a couple of recipes. It would be nice if the default name when saving as a favorite included the name of the recipe rather than the name of the site (particularly for those who want to bookmark more than one recipe). Think you probably just have to make the "<title>" include the recipe name.
First, go and find out about Github. Figure out what it is they do, how they attract users, and how they make money. Github is already operating well in the Programming space, but perhaps the same basic ideas can be applied in the Cooking space. That's where you come in.
Edit: I think it's a great idea, it's just funny that that site mentioned this after only a couple refreshes.
I find it waaaay too geeky for a cooking website. The idea could be useful but as it is right now, it's very hard to understand how it's supposed to work. (Revision 2, what?)
What I'd like to see though, is for all the pictures to be of food. There's a lot of happy faces, but the point of a cook book is to make me feel hungry when looking at the pictures. Not sure how to achieve that though.
I started something similar[1] last Christmas (but lost interest as I never documented my own experiments). It's a great idea and there's need for a de facto standard source for recipes and cooking instructions.
My "next step" was to contact sous chefs of famous restaurants.
Cucumbertown does this very well. They allow you to take a recipe and fork it – called “Write a variation” (on the left) [1]. IIRC quite a few recipes there are created this way.
Having looked at some of the recipes, it might be nice to take the job of layout/formatting away from the recipe submitter and offer some differnt layout options to the person viewing it.
For example, some recipes include the accompanying photos inline, while others collect the photos at the end. If instead, the submitter merely tagged the photos according to what step they accompanied, then the website code can lay them out beatifully in a number of different ways to suit different viewers.
I think I'm thinking something along the lines of LaTeX philosophy: You provide the content and leave the layout to the experts/computer. So you don't write that "Zest of 2 lemons" should be part of a bulleted list, you write that it is an ingredient and leave it to the layout to put it in a suitably formatted ingredient list.
Another advantage is you reduce the ability of less savvy users to make parts of your site look ugly.
It's also a good idea to make it request only the minimum amount of information from the auth provider (e.g., name and email address). I (and I think others) have become wary of sites that ask for full access when there's no obvious reason for it.
Actually, its been shown that the confusion of which account type to use is worse than the bonus of having options at signup. I forget who did the testing, but non-techies have trouble remembering which they used as well as understanding what it means to "sign in with..".
I'd be interested in seeing the study. For me, at least (and I think for many others) the thought of creating yet another login is enough to make me back out.
Okay, I misremembered a bit. They showed that a tiny portion of people used social login (~3%) and that the gain they thought they'd made with them (fewer forgot password/username issues) was due to an unrelated change. The tiny portion shows that it can't be that important (plus, how many of the 3% that took advantage of it would have left without those buttons?).
I apologize for the misinformation in my first comment, but I think my point remains. That said, I feel similarly to you - I just think that a much smaller portion of people feel that way than you realize.
I like it. You need to improve the editor (normal people won't understand markup, just have a text box for ingredients, another for directions and a list for images).
You also need tags so I can tag a recipe as 'Asian' or 'BBQ' to make it organizable.
You should remove all of the pictures that do not show the food and replace all of the low quality pictures as well. When I went to your website the first thing i saw was a bunch of faces and non-appetizing looking onions. You want to make the food look amazing.
[Forkinit](http://forkinit.com/) does a good job of this but hasn't been updated in a while. You might check them out for other ideas in this space. Looks like you have a great start.
I like it. It seems you are aiming at geeks.
And I think geeks want a powerful search interface and this is why I haven't found a website i really like. I want to make queries like
"Recipes with Tomatoes, Paprika but without meat of type soup" or "I only have Garlic, Paprika, bread, Cream, flour, and sugar, eggs and spices , what is the closest meaningful lunch? Not in natural language, but with a interface. Like a textarea for "what i have" "what i don't have/like", and "What kind of meal would it be" each.
"I only have Garlic, Paprika, bread, Cream, flour, and sugar, eggs and spices". Thats not a sane way to cook. You can season your eggs on toast (scrambled eggs with garlic makes a change), but there is nothing else sanely cookable form that list. You need to shop better, this is not a search problem. (I appreciate that you made up that list, but thats not the point).
102 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 159 ms ] threadI really like the idea, but as others have mentioned, it does need some design help.
As for other distinctions, such as "mince" instead of "dice", that would be tricker, but you could probably do that with a human-friendly strikethrough coupled with a handwriting typeface to indicate what was changed.
Why not use github Pages and scrape the github repository for necessary data? It's all harmless recipe stuff anyway. Non-github users could be asked to use e-mail to place recipes, and can be informed that they can use markdown. Or even present a web form that sends an encrypted e-mail for them, employing that wicked JS textarea enhancer we saw the other day, for markdown syntax or even allow haml.
The github haml pages can have links station'd at the top or bottom to pre-fetch categories, previous, and next pages. The github Page Index can include a JS that builds the UI of the site via DOM manipulation, based on a lightweight Web app hosted elsewhere and called in via ajax.Summary: Total MVR (minimum viable repository).
Example:
I know a good designer who can help you with this, by the way.That said, awesome idea.
[0]http://forkthecookbook.com
EDIT: According to Site Advisor (http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/forkthecookbook.com), here are their criteria:
Country indicates where a domain is registered | US/AUS
Popularity indicates how many visitors a website gets | Not very popular
E-mail indicates our overall opinion of a website's e-mail practices | We don't spam
Downloads indicates our overall opinion of a website's downloadable files | No file downloads
Online Affiliations indicates our overall opinion of a website's linking practices | We vet every link. Every write up. It could be one of our authors are having a malware issue. Not sure about that.
Annoyances indicates our overall opinion of a website's pop-up practices. | No popup.
Exploits are rare but extremely dangerous security threats caused by a website "exploiting" a security vulnerability in the browser. | Don't think we have exploits. Something to check
Web reputation McAfee tests websites for web reputation using the TrustedSource™ system. | Totally not helpful
Reviewer and Site Owner Comments | I see no reviews
Do you have any insides how much those recipes get actually forked? I'd be afraid, that forking might be a nice idea, but actually isn't that common.
Thanks for your insight.
If you wish to know more, contact us at admin[at]forkthecookbook.com . Sorry for this, as half of us are terribly ill, and we take turns to answer questions
I'm the creator of Forking Recipes, I'll be happy to answer any questions you have and thanks for taking a look!
On a different note, I'm on a slow internet connection and it's very noticeable that the page is huge and not optimised for bandwidth (some thumbnailing and gzip-ing would be good to add at some point, to make the site as snappy as possible! :) ). https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights#url=h...
Ie a dropdown on the profile settings page.
By the way, are you based in Chicago? I met somebody at the Chicago HN meetup last year who was talking about building this exact idea, and I loved the idea back then too. Are you that person by chance?
dpick, I'd be happy to share the ideas we were kicking around when thinking about this if you want to shoot me an email: john [at] nineteeneightd.com.
First, go and find out about Github. Figure out what it is they do, how they attract users, and how they make money. Github is already operating well in the Programming space, but perhaps the same basic ideas can be applied in the Cooking space. That's where you come in.
Edit: I think it's a great idea, it's just funny that that site mentioned this after only a couple refreshes.
Let's see how non-tech people are able to understand and use such concepts.
Probably not related, though still cool.
What I'd like to see though, is for all the pictures to be of food. There's a lot of happy faces, but the point of a cook book is to make me feel hungry when looking at the pictures. Not sure how to achieve that though.
http://forkthecookbook.com
My "next step" was to contact sous chefs of famous restaurants.
[1] http://palatelab.com/
Edit: rephrased.
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&...
Which is standardized at schema.org: http://www.schema.org/Recipe
[1] http://www.cucumbertown.com/recipes/55228/baked-mac-cheese
For example, some recipes include the accompanying photos inline, while others collect the photos at the end. If instead, the submitter merely tagged the photos according to what step they accompanied, then the website code can lay them out beatifully in a number of different ways to suit different viewers.
I think I'm thinking something along the lines of LaTeX philosophy: You provide the content and leave the layout to the experts/computer. So you don't write that "Zest of 2 lemons" should be part of a bulleted list, you write that it is an ingredient and leave it to the layout to put it in a suitably formatted ingredient list.
Another advantage is you reduce the ability of less savvy users to make parts of your site look ugly.
Your site will get a lot more traction if you implement that, I think. Most people (even non-techie folks) are suffering from account proliferation.
The study can be found here: http://blog.mailchimp.com/social-login-buttons-arent-worth-i...
I apologize for the misinformation in my first comment, but I think my point remains. That said, I feel similarly to you - I just think that a much smaller portion of people feel that way than you realize.
You also need tags so I can tag a recipe as 'Asian' or 'BBQ' to make it organizable.