Choosing a wiki is not easy ...

The developments of forums and the site. Humor and conviviality between the members of the forum - Tout est anything - Presentation of new registered members Relaxation, free time, leisure, sports, vacations, passions ... What do you do with your free time? Forum exchanges on our passions, activities, leisure ... creative or recreational! Publish your ads. Classifieds, cyber-actions and petitions, interesting sites, calendar, events, fairs, exhibitions, local initiatives, association activities .... No purely commercial advertising please.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974

Choosing a wiki is not easy ...




by Christophe » 06/07/07, 18:56

As you know, we are planning to set up a wiki to synthesize pantone searches a bit and make them easier to access for newcomers.

Only here, there are dozens of wiki models.

I am currently testing several but a helping hand in the decision would be welcome.

Here is where I "dig": http://www.framasoft.net/rubrique335.html et
http://www.wikimatrix.org/

For now I have chosen and will test:

- pmWiki
- DokuWiki
- MediaWiki (the one used by Wikipedia)

(I have already "eliminated" ChuWiki bcp too "simplistic")
0 x
User avatar
camel1
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 322
Registration: 29/01/05, 00:29
Location: Loire
x 1
Contact :




by camel1 » 08/07/07, 15:31

Hi Christopher!

I went to see your links, at Framasoft, (I did not imagine such a profusion of implementations! : Shock: ) and I bounced there:

http://www.wikimatrix.org/wizard.php?x=57&y=8

He is a "magician" supposed to guide your choice in this jungle ...

An example of what I got, based on the criteria I gave, summarized at the start:

That's it!

Alright. You want a hosted offer with WYSIWYG editing and a page history using your own domain and which allows your own corporate branding.

The following 13 Wikis match your criteria:

BrainKeeper, CentralDesktop, ClearWiki, EditMe, Metadot Wiki, Netcipia, PBwiki, SamePage, SeedWiki, Socialtext, StikiPad, Wetpaint and Wikispaces

→ Compare them

→ Customize your choices in the Search


I like the "Compare them" : Lol:

Otherwise, there are apparently "wisiwig" wikis, which a priori provides an answer to the debate around coding. We don't necessarily need to complicate our lives, if that helps ...

A ++

Michel
0 x
We were on the brink, but we made a big step forward ...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 12/07/07, 14:24

Well I did a little tour of the existing.

I think that the Media Wiki (that of wikipedia) is ultimately the most suitable because everyone knows it and is therefore not too messy.

So I think we will go on this one unless there are reflections / disputes about this choice ...
0 x
User avatar
plasmanu
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2847
Registration: 21/11/04, 06:05
Location: The 07170 Lavilledieu viaduct
x 180




by plasmanu » 05/06/12, 06:27

Small digging, because not finding a wiki subject, I land here

Why too many wiki kills wiki :?:

ImageOUImage


- Critique of collective creation

A very interesting article on InternetActu reports on Jaron Lanier's criticisms against the ideology of free software, arguing that collective creation is more conservative than innovative.

“For Lanier, a dangerous ideology,“ digital maoism ”, is emerging behind ICTs consisting, little by little, in denying the importance of individuals. An ideology of“ the hive ”which would be at work behind Wikipedia, for example. "The beauty of the internet," he writes, "is that it connects people. Its value is others. If one comes to believe that the internet itself might have some thing to say, we devalue the worth of others and we turn into idiots. ”

Without being false, this review does not take into account the fact that if collaborative work is essential, it is because of the complexity involved, the only reason why free software can be superior to proprietary software. The conclusion of the article seems to me to be the right one: we must manage to combine individual creation and collective work.

"In the end, one can wonder if it is not possible to obtain the best of both worlds: a software design system that would work, like science, in a punctuated manner, alternating the opening phases and those of 'encapsulation'.


link
link
0 x
"Not to see Evil, not to hear Evil, not to speak Evil" 3 little monkeys Mizaru
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 05/06/12, 08:53

Hey, it's funny seen from this angle! First, there are several ways of approaching the subject, depending on its cultural practices. Who will influence his way of thinking ... an Asian, an oriental or an African of origin, would undoubtedly have opinions, sometimes diametrically opposed, because let us not forget that the Internet as much as the wiki are to be considered at the international level ...

Thus, I am not sure that the notions given in the text in italics above, would be perceived as we understand it in our European way of seeing, everywhere else in the world. We could imagine so many wikis ... and so many ways of interpreting them. Imagine a wiki made by the Maasai of Kenya or the Issans of Southeast Asia ...

Some loose thoughts from the “Western” point of view, which shows the complexity of the problem:

Belonging needs
Negation of the individual and not of individuals?
It absolutely seems to me that the internet is the negation of the individual (and not of individuals, who thanks to him can have a "collective revenge" => for example the "flash mobs" which take a political turn as with "The Arab Spring" ...) it is again the negation of the individual by the multiplicity of sources ... which means that like a bottle in the sea, he disappears, lost in the immensity of the canvas. .. Or it meets between "user tribes".

Internet users = immigrants?
Then there is also the hemorrhage of the links which constitute a kind of immigration, or permanent incentive to go and see if the grass is greener elsewhere, and which means that we very quickly find ourselves quite far from our point. attachment or entry into the canvas. Yet another drift which leads to the negation of the individual. Still plenty of other way of seeing the thing according to its culture. Or, rather than being dispersed, users will refocus on drop-off points that they know and “which will reassure them” ....

But related or not, what I find paradoxical is that the Internet - because of its virtual nature - is above all a source of frustrations.

Security requirements
A tool of power or of counter-power?
Paradoxically, the internet is even more clearly a tool for displaying power ... (It is perhaps a common denominator beyond the cultural divide ...) Knowledge is also power! But possibly counter-power.

We can see it very well with the google adds which is a permanent machine to swallow up Internet users to constantly attract them elsewhere from their primary motivation ... There it is a power of recovery.

The digital divide is between those who master VS those who cannot afford it and who find themselves diluted in the mass. The weak links proceed to strengthen the strong links when they ally themselves with tantacular monsters such as Google ...

Moral it would be necessary to be on ALL screens at the same time to keep control and to have an audience (TV, smartphones, graphics tablets and woueb, and of course: written press ...)

Curious that many conventional media have not thought about it ... Because there again, it is the power which tends to win (VS the counter-power, less organized and having less means ...).

And always a question of power: who can afford a marketing war machine, if not the big sturctures?

Thus, the balance of power on the internet does not present any particular danger, since they are virtual. It could be otherwise when it goes to the real world (as with the Arab Spring, instrumentalized by the CIA via Facebook ...)

Social needs
Crumbling of society?
Yes, the internet is the result of a crumbling of information, therefore of society and a fortiriori of individuals! But it depends on what they do with it, and how they understand it each in their culture.

Thus the race to the volume of frequentation is the cornerstone of the "success" of a wiki, whereas it should be the quality of the material that one finds there! There is then a sort of escalation in the sophistication of the content. What “internet could mean” becomes very relative, although that doesn't help! Man learns humility there ...

The eternal duality between content and form, recast by the internet where the content counts as much as the form, would tend to distance man even further from the very essence of knowledge. It is ultimately his intelligence that will make the difference. What he will do with it ...

Individualism and personal will
So, I don't know if “the internet has something to say”, all I know is above all that the leveling is done at first glance by the “personal will” of the individuals who make the woueb a customized Spanish hostel according to the needs and desires of each of them and passing through the cultural potion of each ... This is a big weak point that prevents Internet users from federating, but it is also what allows them to be preserved. In my opinion, social networks are a lure. They make communities believe. But these are facade communities, where the members are very involved because they are rather egocentric ...

Suddenly, the value of collective work takes a hit ...

Finally, in terms of "social needs" the net has "not invented anything" or not much or "nothing to say", it is only the reflection of men and their way of communicating with each other. It's just the Internet which as a new tool reveals it to us, isn't it?

Development needs
What ethical dimension?
Finally, there is something completely forgotten or very neglected: it is the ethical dimension of our relationship to information and communication.
Before the internet age, there were conventions in the circulation of information, a kind of ethics with its rules and uses. An intellectual property that was relatively well respected between “content producers” and broadcasters.
The Internet, by not implementing the traceability of “creation products” from authors (text, music, video, etc.), has blown up all the conventions that had been in force until then ...
Thus, anyone today can proclaim himself: journalist, photographer, videographer and publish “his works” on the web. That everyone can also sting, without payment of any retribution.
Creatives already struggled before the internet, but there they have become very vulnerable due to precarious ethical rules ... This does not encourage innovation and certainly constitutes an obstacle to development: another negation of the more individual!

Sorry for the “cobblestone”, but it's a very interesting topic!

Conclusion: a wiki can become more or less universal, as long as it remains "factual".

But the fundamental intellectual debate is worth the detour ...
0 x
User avatar
plasmanu
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2847
Registration: 21/11/04, 06:05
Location: The 07170 Lavilledieu viaduct
x 180




by plasmanu » 05/06/12, 13:47

Ah if I didn't hate philosophy so much ... that's well said

The best and the worst of the internet: what's the difference?
Everyone does what he wants.
0 x
"Not to see Evil, not to hear Evil, not to speak Evil" 3 little monkeys Mizaru
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 05/06/12, 18:07

Creatives already struggled before the internet, but there they have become very vulnerable due to precarious ethical rules ... This does not encourage innovation and certainly constitutes an obstacle to development: another negation of the more individual!


The "savage" in the depths of the Amazon, who does not know the meaning that we in the West give to the word "property", must not understand that creatives do not give what they have to give to others. The value is to give or to profit?
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 05/06/12, 18:34

These "savages" cited as an example, I gave them a Flytox name: Issans, Maasai, etc.

Strangely enough, but we understand why, these “strong cultures” often have the common denominator that you mention! That's what perpetuates them, isn't it?

But from a Western point of view (maybe you read diagonally), the "Intellectual propertyIs in the laws! Hadopi, the PMOI and the business of more or less free download sites are there to remind us.

But you're right, wikis are shaking up our way of doing things, and they push us to question ourselves, since they are deemed to be contributory and in principle unpaid! This is why I was talking about ethical rules: they are lacking ... starting with respect! There have touched on the fundamentals.

This is why, seen with a ladle, I like this observation which would consider the woueb as being a kind of "digital maoism"(in the sense that some of its characteristics link it to thought, culture and history). Because by the way, there are three types of Maoism ...>

Because collectivism [down to earth under Mao] takes on its full value, almost exclusively in respect for one another. And there in the West, it's very tangent ...

Plasmanu: at least as much sociological and theosophical (without theurgy) as philosophical ...? I know, I complicate : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 05/06/12, 19:32

... and of course psychological (even more complicated ^^) another common denominator, which makes the concept fragile "sociologically": it is the ease with which transgression is carried out on the internet ... Because in some case it can be desired (in the Freudian sense, for example, but also read Wittgenstein and Lacan on the "sublimation of the act" ...>) while in others not.
In the primitive peoples, although the meaning given to the word property differs (or applies otherwise), the transgression of certain rules, were (and still are) punished with banishment, prison, even capital punishment!

In the West, the Madoff case (150 years in prison) "nanalysed" through the psychological prism, which shows some aspects of these questions of transgressions:

The notion of transgression entered psychoanalysis only gradually. Indeed, the word already had a well established meaning in ethnology, a science from which Sigmund Freud drew inspiration. Its definition was to some extent a negative one, in opposition to taboo, prohibition, and law.

Source: ...>

Suddenly, it also responds to Flytox. : Lol:
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 05/06/12, 21:33

the idea of ​​a wiki is very good! I thought I had suggested it not long ago, but I see that this post is much older!

I participated a little at the beginning of a wiki on the forum fun chemistry ... then fun science.net

they chose wikimedia, so as not to change the good wikipedia habit ... this wiki has some flaws, but since we have to get used to wikipedia we also tolerate them for another

I also need a wiki for professional use to serve as a communication tool in a company, I may prefer a wyswyg wiki ... but addressing a closed audience it is easier to make a original choice and assume the maintenance

for forum as econology it is most logical to follow the Wikipedia model

I looked for wikis without a database: all the pages are readable and copyable documents with windows or other ... but it is useful for a small wiki with limited use ... for a real large wiki the real base given as wikimedia is the right solution

at the beginning of the amusing science wiki.net we were afraid to duplicate wikipedia ... but no moderation of a specialized wiki is completely different from wikipedia

much of the information that accumulates on this forum cannot be put on wikipedia, who wants to remain too encyclopedic, who refuses what is too practical, who refuses what is too commercial or especially what is practical information on current trade

wikipedia also refuses to store ideas for the future: wikipedia only wants what exists and is proven: the classification of ideas to be developed nevertheless has a certain ecological importance! on condition of classifying well and not mixing and confusing the ideas to be explored, the projects, and the encyclopedic truths

some way of categorizing things is easier on a new wiki than on the huge wikipedia: for example the chemical formula categorization which was difficult on wikipedia was implemented on the fun science wiki, and after doing its proof was started on wikipedia ... and the wikipediste we finished the work

there was a lot of exchange of ideas between the 2 wikis: it is therefore logical to choose wikimedia for econology
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "The bistro: site life, leisure and relaxation, humor and conviviality and Classifieds"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 261 guests