On 9/20/05, Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

So why not just use one of the open source Wiki environments? They
> support all this stuff? If they aren't good enough as is, modify one of
> them and make it an optional extra. Mozilla composer? Again improving
> that would be less draining on resources that inventing something new.


Here's what I want to avoid - having to download anything (although an
optional "off-line / in browser" version could be available, along with the
big-dog OOo suite). It needs to be able to run from any computer in the
world with Net Access and a broswer. OS-agnostic. Browser-agnostic.
Standards-based stuff. It needs to be able to save to a hard drive or flash
drive - or be emailled to whereever, or published via FTP. Of course, if
someone wants to host WebOOo and offer (for pay?) optional hosting of the
documents, then great! But the option to save as DOC, OpenDocument, PDF,
Flash, RTF, or whatever needs to be there. Wikis usually just publish to the
site in html or php or whatever. It's not a printable, sendable document.
Wikis are for web-publishing, not document creation.

Personally I can't really understand why most of the OOo website isn't a
> wiki. Ok have the bits that need to shut people out as secure as Fort
> Knox, but Wikipedia shows that if you make it easy to contribute you get
> a lot of contributions.


Amen to that! Wikis/blogs/comments/community/user-created - all very cool.

-Chad Smith

Reply via email to