Erick Bourgeois wrote: > Great to see you back. > I installed and played with CGI::Kwiki. The main problem I have > with this module/application is that users need to learn the wiki > "language". (For example, to make a the H4 tag, you must put > 4 = before and after the word(s).)
I am planning to use plain POD for the Kwiki, there will be no need for wiki markup itself. > The benefit of the content manager I use is that it uses HTML and > thus it has no learning curve in this respect. May I ask what you > found to be difficult? I've used it very little, but for example I seem to remember that making a link from a page to another one was a little messy (since the pages seem to be dinamically generated). but above all, the main problem is that I don't want HTML documentation, but rather POD that can be translated to HTML. translating from HTML to anything else is more painful (not impossible, but painful). and having the documentation in POD is unarguably a benefit (think about perldoc, search.cpan.org, etc.) > Aldo, I really do believe this should help, otherwise it would be a bit > cumbersome to completly move away from this and transfer over to > CGI::Kwiki. But, like I said in an earlier post, if people really don't like > it, then I guess I could switch over to CGI::Kwiki. so let's ask people what they prefer. I, personally, would go with CGI::Kwiki with native POD format for editing. let's vote this and decide :-) cheers, Aldo __END__ $_=q,just perl,,s, , another ,,s,$, hacker,,print;
