See also: ChoosingaWiki
, or WikiEngineReviewWikiLists WikiEngineReviewTable
List of WikiEngines Reviewed
Thanks to Ward Cunningham for tolerating these pages.
I have some thoughts about attempting to get this published, probably in a slightly different format. If it is published, I will give credit to all named contributors, a general credit to unnamed contributors, and credit to WardsWiki. If you have comments about this let me know. (Perhaps we should immediately start a new page, PublishingWikiContent?.)
In the wiki pages listed below, (you and) I will try to provide information about several different WikiEngines
, including WardsOriginalWikiEngine
) in order to facilitate choosing an appropriate wiki. In the course of doing this I will also discuss WikiFarms
(web sites that will host a wiki for you, either public or private, for free or for a fee).
is unfinished (but has been significantly improved by SunirShah
). It contains links to general information about wikis. It also may contain information which you may need to properly interpret, comment on, or fill out the reviews.
contains the list of attributes to be evaluated. It can serve as a template for evaluation of additional WikiEngines
. The intent of each attribute on the template is described on WikiEngineReviewTemplateAnnotated
I want to maintain reviews for old versions of WikiEngines
that might still be in use on particular WikiFarms
developed the approach of providing an intermediate page and identifying each wiki version with the version number in words. Thanks, Juergen!
will contain definitions of some terms. The terms wiki, Wiki, WikiEngine
, and WikiWeb
are explained on that page.
The first "messages" below have been moved (and refactored) from my home page.
review inaccurate, my Wiki requirements are strange
"Your review on WikiEngineReviewWardsOriginalWiki
is extremely inaccurate. I had fixed it, but I lost the edit conflict (and all that work). Now I don't have time to redo it; maybe later." -ss -- I agree, it needs work. I am working my way through some of the other reviews before going back to it. If someone else can fix the factual errors or omissions that would be great, and if you want to express a different opinion, there is a "Comments by Users" section (which can be used by reviewers as well).
"Also, your requirements for a wiki are rather strange. If you could motivate your requirements, maybe we could help you find an appropriate match or change your mind. If you really want a lot of hard security, perhaps TWiki is your best choice, but you should read http://usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?SoftSecurity
first. -- SunirShah
" -ss -- I prepared page WikiEngineReviewRhkCriteria
(and then revised it) and WikiEngineReviewRhkCriteriaDiscussion
to describe my motivations.
"I have responded to your motivations. Keep in mind that I am a "trust and simplicity" zealot. --ss" -- Sunir's comments are on WikiEngineReviewRhkCriteriaDiscussion
. I left one of my (refactored) comments below:
"...I am focused (not necessarily in order of importance) on (building and maintaining):
- one or more private information resources
- one or more public collaborative information resources
- one or more communities
- <something else I can't articulate yet?>
I am looking at a wiki as a tool that might support all three, if I find a WikiEngine
with the right capabilities. ..." -rhk
Renaming These Pages
wrote to thank me for my efforts, and the efforts of other contributors -- "My thanks go to SunirShah
and all the others, that support this review project." (and mine too - rhk) and to suggest renaming the pages, at least partially to make it clear that this is an effort at reviewing WikiEngines
and not WikiForums
Update: I am now in the process of updating all pages to start with WikiEngineReview
-- I am in no particular hurry, but as I add or update pages I will do it. -- RandyKramer
Swiki vs. ComSwiki
wrote to suggest that I review ComSwikis?
in addition to Swikis.
I am still confused about Swiki vs. ComSwiki
, and will write back to support at the swiki farm to see if they can clarify this for me.
I wrote the review for WikiSwikiReviewTwoEight?
as if it were not a ComSwiki
- The swiki farm uses a modified version of the Squeak wiki, and provided a link. I jumped to a conclusion then, that they are using a modified version of Swiki 2.8 (not ComSwiki 11 (or 2.8))
- The swiki farm engine recognizes the "embedded in equal sign" syntax for headings instead of the "multiple !" syntax that a ComSwiki seems to recognize.
Update: See WikiEngineReviewSwiki
for the current disposition of this issue. The farm is apparently not using Swiki 2.8 or ComSwiki
11, but a fork they created earlier in the development process and which they have retrofitted with selected improvements from Swiki, ComSwiki
, or other sources. Thus, the Swiki farm is probably not an accurate example of the capabilities of either Swiki 2.8 or ComSwiki
1/10/01: Other resources
Long links intentionally split to allow proper word wrap (i.e., so that, in narrow windows, other lines will wrap to the width of the window) -- copy and paste to follow the link.
12/17/00: Short Term Plans / Goals:
Older Status Updates To be deleted soon
- Modify the template (and all current reviews) to include some attributes about data storage. Is there more than one "back end"? Is (can) the content (be) stored in a manner that facilitates:
- Improved search by use of a "local" search engine (like htdig or Alta Vista Personal)
- Global search and replace (to facilitate many things, including page name changes)
- Import and export to, for example, support synch between a "main" public wiki and someone's backup, working, portable (on a laptop), or private wiki.
- Watch for comments -- does anybody have additional suggestions for attributes to add to the review template? Nominations of the wiki engine that will satisfy all my hopes and desires? (Do I need to improve WikiEngineReviewRhkObjectives or WikiEngineReviewRhkCriteria to make them clear or complete?)
- Install Cygwin and use diff and patch to expedite the changes to the template and reviews described above.
- I may make a pass at reviewing ZWiki, PhpWiki, and MoinMoin (building on Juergen's work).
- At that point, I may stop my reviews, and hope that others who need information like this about wikis will find the existing reviews useful, the list of attributes helpful; and will decide to fill in what they can about a wiki when they investigate one that has not been reviewed (or add to or correct existing reviews).
- Learn Perl (in progress, see CLUG:TopicPerlLearning? (http://www.clug.org/cgi/wiki.cgi?PerlLearning))
- Make a test installation of TWiki, see if I (with help) can modify it to disable HTML. Consider other modifications like improved email notification (per page, topic, or category, although I guess I could make a "web" per topic).
Preliminary (or first draft) reviews of TWiki, Swiki, Twiky, WardsOriginalWiki
), and UseMod
are on this site. They can all use vetting by knowledgeable users.
I have added a message section at the bottom of this page. I am moving and refactoring most messages related to these reviews from my "home" page to here. There are active (unresolved) messages in that area relating to:
Your help is welcome in resolving any of these items.
Doesn't it make more sense to write the review on the page for the wiki itself? Ex: to write a review for WikiVisualWorks? on the WikiVisualWorks? page?
WikiEngineReview Originator / Author, Maintainer, Contributors