Talk:Wiki software

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi!

Does anybody know if there is a feature comparison between different wiki softwares? - SoniC

Contents

[edit] CGI

The article says wiki engines are usually implemented as a CGI script. Am I right to doubt about this? I guess the Perl wikis were dominating once, but what now with PHP...and Wikimedia?--Chealer 06:33, 2004 Nov 17 (UTC)

The term "CGI Scripts" encompasses all kinds of server side program, including PHP and Perl, etc. 129.67.109.135 17:43, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Text Wiki

Would this help in being able to convert from one wiki to another (e.g., PHPwiki to Mediawiki)? [[User:Brettz9|Brettz9 (talk)]] 02:19, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Would what help?--Chealer 06:18, 2004 Nov 17 (UTC)

[edit] Huge list of engines considered harmful

Should we do away with, or at least prune heavily, the list of engines in this article?

  • Wiki:WikiEngines describes itself as "the canonical list of WikiEngines", whereas this list is doomed to being incomplete; that page also links to other resources on the topic.
  • It's currently badly layed out (what kind of a sub-heading is "Microsoft"?)
  • We have rather inconsistent information ("CitiWiki [8] (http://wiki.cs.cityu.edu.hk/citiwiki) has been called the "Wiki of the next generation"."; by whom, and meaning what exactly?)
  • All the engines are [[linked]], but most of them are probably non-encyclopedic, meriting a mention on this page at the very most.
  • As already mentioned, Wikipedia is not a web directory.

Perhaps we should just limit ourselves to a list of "popular or noteworthy wiki engines", and be quite harsh in our judgement of people declaring their own wikis "noteworthy". If not, someone needs to go through this list and make it a whole lot more consistent and, well, useful. - IMSoP 16:38, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

We should keep, at the minimum, the ones which we have articles on. Angela. 20:24, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
Well, perhaps that should be "at minimum, the ones we should have articles on": there may well be worthy articles as yet unwritten (FlexWiki, for instance, is arguably notable as being an open source project developed by Microsoft), and currently-existent articles on non-notable engines (possible examples: CitiWiki, OpenWiki). Hence the criterion of "noteworthy": if it's worthy of an article, it's worthy of a place on this list. On the other hand, it may not be worthy of a whole article to itself, but be worth mentioning here in summary. - IMSoP 18:01, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Don't see the harm - there's also a fairly large list of Blog engines, for instance (IMO, not even large enough). It will help people find the software that most fits their needs. - JavaWoman 10:57, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
If the page gets too large and cumbersome, it could possibly be split into other sub-pages, depending on platform, software type etc.

[edit] List of Example Wikis

I think it would be a good idea to put together some sort of list of example wiki sites (not engines). True, Wikipedia is not intended to be a web directory, and that should be avoided, but I think there's room to do something in that direction without crossing the web directory line.

Perhaps something categorized by type of wiki? E.g. Teachers/academics -> are doing this sort of stuff with wikis. Software companies -> are doing this sort of stuff with wikis. Companies -> Non-profits -> Communities ->

Andor, if such exists somewhere maybe?, maybe link to it under external links?

Thoughts?

- :) Ozzyslovechild 19:26, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comparison of wiki software

I created Comparison of wiki software and would like to one day absorb the rough list found in this topic into that. -- Sy / (talk) 16:30, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)


[edit] table interface

Is there any wiki implementation that is not only based on a database behind, but that offers a database interface on top? I'd like to get the best of both worlds: an open wiki system for modifications and improvements, as well as a database display. That is: Search in certain fields, sort on fields, include/exclude/reorder fields for display - and offer special summary and formatting functions, e.g. in order to group record lines. Maybe you want to read 'fields' as columns and 'records' as rows of a table, including subsummaries and header areas in between the table. I checked the list and comparision, but I did not see any functional recommendations here. --Traut 15:27, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Talk%7EWiki_software_e57e.html"