On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM, TJ Frazier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote: > >> >> >> On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton >>> <[email protected] >>> <mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.**org<[email protected]>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> +1 on MediaWiki >>> >>> The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the >>> migration and it was concluded that would not be done. �Kay Schenk >>> might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and >>> experience since. >>> >>> �- Dennis >>> >>> >>> Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion. >>> >>> I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a >>> lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth. >>> >>> I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless >>> of what it is. >>> >>> Mostly I use the "Project Planning" area. >>> >>> So, >>> >>> +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to >>> go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc. >>> gets moved >>> >> >> I would like to add one more thought/request on this topic. >> >> I've actually used Confluence -- the cwiki environment -- more over the >> course of my wiki work than MediaWiki, but there are pros and cons to >> each. >> >> What I REALLY like about our current cwiki setup, is the apparently >> automatic navigation generation feature. So, when you add a page under a >> category, you can quickly see what other pages are there for that area. >> This makes putting ideas "out there" very quick and efficient. >> >> I don't know MW provides in this this regard. But features like this >> make using cwki for planning pretty easy since there's no futzing with >> filing into categories etc. SO, if there is a way to do this same kind >> of thin in MW, we should definitely enable such a feature. >> >> Hi, Kay, > > IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a > parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than > categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less > convenient, but gives you more control. Well that's what the popular opinion here seems to be. > You /can/ create child pages, using the "slash" (/) notation; see my user > page [1] for several examples. On the child page, you get breadcrumbs at > the top. > OK, I'll look at this > > While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; I can't speak to that. I sued it in my former employment. But, it was not the "public facing" entity. I know MW is really that among other things. it's good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, > it gets harder to find. > OK, thanks for this information. I actually did try to find some information about the navigator path business in the MW docs, but nothing jumped out at me. I fully realize that maintaining these two entities for our use is NOT optimal. Not at all. I'm fine with exclusive use of MW thought I will miss some of the cwiki features. > > [1] > <http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**TJFrazier<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier> > > > > /tj/ > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "Everything will be all right in the end... if it's not all right then it's not the end. " -- Sonny, "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel"
