Synthèse Wikis (en anglais)

Article publié dans: Logiciels et programmation le mardi 5 avril 2005 à 15:24 par Serge
Lu 3664 fois | 4 commentaire(s)

[source : liste de diffusion TEI-L, mardi 5 avril 2005 14:49]

A couple of weeks ago I posted a query about which Wiki software programs people are using for project documentation. I received several offline responses and have had a chance to look at the programs mentioned as well as several others. People pointed me to :

- XWiki : (Java-based)
- PhPWiki :
- WikkiTikkiTavi (sic) :
- JSPWikki : (Java-based)

In addition I looked at :

- DokuWiki :
- MediaWiki :
- Wikka Wiki :

One resource I found very helpful was

- :

which is a website that describes and reviews a variety of content management system programs, including wikis, and maintains installed "sandbox" versions of each programs that are open to public testing, so you can try out a program without having to install it locally.

I discovered, not surprisingly, that there is no one "best" wiki program, but instead quite a few good programs each of which has different strengths. For the purpose of in-house documentation of project management, editorial usages, and software development, I’ve decided to go with DokuWiki. Here are some of its strengths in that role :

- Data is kept in flat files rather than database (more portable and backup can be part of system backup ; search speed not a real issue for modest-sized data)

- Rich formatting syntax combined with GUI editor for ease of use

- Automatic generation of page tables of contents based on heading levels

- Easy demarcation and display of non-parsed code snippets

- Included print CSS stylesheet provides well-formatted documentation printout or potential conversion to PDF

Like most of the powerful wiki packages, it has revision control allowing rollback to any previous version, but unlike some others (notably WikkiTikkiTavi) you can’t easily do a "diff" on any two arbitrary revisions. It also doesn’t have attached per-page comments as MediaWikki has ; comments have to appear as part of a document, specially formatted. (For software development/documentation this probably makes sense. It’s a disadvantage if you want to enable metadiscussion of a document, as in the Wikipedia encyclopedia entries.)

—  David Sewell, Editorial and Technical Manager Electronic Imprint, The University of Virginia Press PO Box 400318, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4318 USA Courier : 310 Old Ivy Way, Suite 302, Charlottesville VA 22903 Email : Tel : +1 434 924 9973


Dans la même rubrique

Toutes les rubriques

Logiciels et programmation
Suivi du site Transversale
Vu Ailleurs (sur le web)...
Standards, modèles, formats d’échange...
Référencement, moteurs de recherche, classements internationaux
Conception graphique, ergonomie et webdesign
Enjeux, aspects juridiques et sociaux, évolution des métiers, formation continue...
Publication scientifique et édition en ligne
Blogoshpère Académique
Systèmes & réseaux, sécurité informatique

Nuage de mots

droit d’auteur ajax java php xml colloques Contenus Endnote humour i-conf lodel Métadonnées Optimisation peer commentary peer review pratiques pédagogiques Refworks validation scientifique Vidéo blog CMS ENT Flash gestion bibliographique Outil Spip Wiki Editions critiques Hal Université couleur css Ergonomie Evolution du web Expérience utilisateur Google Interface riche Internet explorer tests Web 2.0 webdesign


Nos sites

Site réalisé avec SPIP | squelette Inter.not 1.0 | Admin | Webmestre | Suivre la vie du site RSS 2.0

Créative Commons : Les publications sur Transversale sont mises à disposition selon le Contrat Paternité-Partage des Conditions Initiales à l'Identique 2.0 France
Creative Commons License