From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OLbIy-0007Xb-T1 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:19:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 12E2EE0B16; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 12:19:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail1.nippynetworks.com (mail1.nippynetworks.com [212.227.250.41]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17C36E0AF8 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 12:19:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (mail1.nippynetworks.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail1.nippynetworks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F51D4805F for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:19:30 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at nippynetworks.com Received: from mail1.nippynetworks.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail1.nippynetworks.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id r3sjSyEoagJ0 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:19:30 +0100 (BST) Received: from Ed-Wildgooses-MacBook-Pro.local (office.nippynetworks.com [94.194.201.187]) (Authenticated sender: edward@wildgooses.com) by mail1.nippynetworks.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3AB15674129 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:19:30 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4C0CE3D1.5030705@wildgooses.com> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:19:29 +0100 From: Ed W User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.4 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki References: <20100403163010.1897d663@mail.a3li.li> <4BB7D11F.7060207@gentoo.org> <20100404003152.4b2012da@angelstorm> In-Reply-To: <20100404003152.4b2012da@angelstorm> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 4d5f5cbb-781a-4155-abc0-43f512108917 X-Archives-Hash: ded80fb2ee29a9fa29d53fe5459cdaab Hi > Show me a wiki that makes it easy to create tables, for example, compare RadeonProgram from the x.org wiki: > > http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonProgram?action=edit > > ||<-2 style="text-align: center; background-color: #666666"> '''Native''' || '''R100''' || '''R200''' || '''R300''' || '''R400''' || '''RS690''' || '''R500''' || '''R600''' || '''R700''' || > > > . . . that's one line of cells. One. Ugly. Compare it to: > > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xml-guide.xml#doc_chap5_pre1 > > > > > > > > This is an example for indentation > more stuff > >
FooBar
> > Which is easier to read and instantly comprehend? > Yes, but the wiki layout is badly written, you should be comparing it to: || '''Native''' || '''R100''' || '''R200''' || '''R300''' || '''R400''' || '''RS690''' || '''R500''' || '''R600''' || '''R700''' || I think this reads ok? In fact with a bit of thought from some premade styles even the ''' bit should go? > By moving to a wiki, you'll lose a huge percentage of what GuideXML can do, in exchange for "quicker" and "easier" editing and creation of docs, though neither of these have been qualified. I think this summarises the basic tradeoff - you trade editing speed for "simplicity" of syntax and readability. Clearly as your example shows it's possible to write complicated looking stuff in any syntax though, but in general wiki's win where the content is most important and styling is done separately using CSS (a bit like guideXML really) > As some others on this list have mentioned, wiki syntax is downright ugly and simply not as consistent or readable as plain ol' XML or HTML. > I think this is a point of contention. Certainly it was a design goal for the wiki syntax to be simple and easily readable, but one man's "simple" is another mans XML... > From what I've seen, the biggest objection to GuideXML is folks don't want to take the time to learn a few tags. Well, you'll have to learn tags and syntax for either system, so pick your poison. I've yet to see a wiki that even has as much sense as HTML, which is pretty low on the totem pole of consistency. > Actually I think GuideXML is excellent - if there is a wiki style engine which allows you to post in GuideXML then we should do it? I think it's not an objection to the GuideXML which is the problem, but creating a system which can be edited quickly and easily in a granular fashion. Eg imagine all the guideXML docs being in a git repo with open access to pull/push changes - you could build a web engine around that which rebuilds the web pages interactively as people push edits and this would be cool! In the meantime wiki's are just trying to solve the same goal of easy edits with small granularity of edits However, I love the idea of a "wiki" based around git using GuideXML! (probably it kind of works like this right now - I think it's the access control which is the secret sauce...) > I ain't out to stop ya'll from using a wiki. I do agree that they have some advantages. However, I will point out how limited wikis are. They're not a magic bullet that will solve all our problems. > Definitely. Good luck Ed W