Colobot Forum - International Colobot Community
Wiki - Printable Version

+- Colobot Forum - International Colobot Community (https://colobot.info/forum)
+-- Forum: [Archive] New forum (2015-2019) (https://colobot.info/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=76)
+--- Forum: International Colobot Community (https://colobot.info/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=50)
+---- Forum: General (https://colobot.info/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=53)
+---- Thread: Wiki (/showthread.php?tid=516)

Pages: 1 2

Wiki - Simbax - 01-04-2015

What do we do about the Wiki? It has a lot of unverified pages, it's not completed and it might contain even false informations.

Maybe we should focus on writing a Wiki after configuring the forum. Having an up-to-date documentation is very useful. It will be hard task to do, but after we do it once, it will be much easier to maintain it. I mean, it is much easier to write new pages right after a new feature has been added or to update the current ones, but we must have a base to work with.

Here's the idea: we keep the old Wiki where it is, but in the meantime we write content on DokuWiki (colobot.info/tempwiki?) and replace the old one when it's done.

RE: Wiki - krzys_h - 01-04-2015

Don't forget that switching to DokuWiki wasn't yet discussed. I think we should stay on MediaWiki.

RE: Wiki - tomangelo - 01-04-2015

So, what are the advantages of dokuwiki over mediawiki?

RE: Wiki - Simbax - 01-04-2015

http://www.bbroy.com/2013/04/why-dokuwiki-is-better-than-mediawiki.html

Here's why I personally don't like MediaWiki:
  • It is ugly! And I cannote it with the old, boring encyclopaedia, which takes all of the fun (it's a wiki of the game after all) and motivation to use it.
  • Editor doesn't work very well. Couldn't use Polish letters using Alt combinations as I remember. And it kept showing me errors when I wanted to preview the page.
  • I didn't count it, but DokuWiki seems to have more built-in and more polished features.
  • Also, for things like documentation it feels better. I mean, MediaWiki is more like a dictionary, and DokuWiki feels like it was built with a documentations in mind. Example: https://wiki.frictionalgames.com/start
  • Navigation on our Wiki is horrible.
Don't take these points as proper arguments, rather an opinion. I haven't even used DokuWiki. Why don't we at least test it for few days?

Maybe someone more acquainted will tell more. 

RE: Wiki - krzys_h - 01-04-2015

(01-04-2015, 02:00 PM)Simbax Wrote: It is ugly! And I cannote it with the old, boring encyclopaedia, which takes all of the fun (it's a wiki of the game after all) and motivation to use it.
That's because we're using the default theme. That will change at some point.
(01-04-2015, 02:00 PM)Simbax Wrote: Editor doesn't work very well. Couldn't use Polish letters using Alt combinations as I remember. And it kept showing me errors when I wanted to preview the page.
I don't know, it works fine for me.
(01-04-2015, 02:00 PM)Simbax Wrote: Also, for things like documentation it feels better.
I agree with that. This is why we were using DokuWiki earlier, when the wiki was just information for developers. But for me, description of ingame objects, functions is not the same as documentation of the game engine etc.
(01-04-2015, 02:00 PM)Simbax Wrote: Navigation on our Wiki is horrible.
That's true, but it has nothing to do with MediaWiki itself Wink

PS. That fast quote plugin is really cool

RE: Wiki - Simbax - 01-04-2015

(01-04-2015, 02:16 PM)krzys_h Wrote: But for me, description of ingame objects, functions is not the same as documentation of the game engine etc.

In Colobot it is the same. It's the game aimed to learn programming. CBOT is a programming language, so it needs a documentation. Objects are part of the programming (and making levels), so they are included in the documentation. And custom levels are not a part of a game itself, so they are considered as a kind of mods -- documentation. If we needed only descriptions of the game universe we'd probably keep the Wikia, but Colobot is much more complicated game and a proper documentation is much needed. I would call it even a part of the learning experience. Skill of using a documentation is very important.

Also, this wiki is supposed to help us, as the developers. Normally it can be created by community, but our Wiki is (will be) basically an important part of the game itself. So it's not really a normal Wiki, but documentation.

RE: Wiki - tomangelo - 01-04-2015

I've found a comparision of dokuwiki and mediawiki http://www.wikimatrix.org/compare/dokuwiki+mediawiki

RE: Wiki - CHmSID - 01-04-2015

So the development of dokuwiki is more active. Beside that, the only big difference I found are the syntax highlights and the fact dokuWiki uses files instead of a database(I don't really know what this implies though)

I think dokuWiki is superior to mediaWiki

RE: Wiki - krzys_h - 01-04-2015

We have syntax highlighting in MediaWiki for CBot. If you want syntax highlighing for the wikicode, there definitely is a plugin for that.
The fact that DokuWiki uses files instead of the database doesn't really matter.

RE: Wiki - Simbax - 01-07-2015

No one is replying, so I think we must decide what to do by a poll. Vote.

RE: Wiki - krzys_h - 01-07-2015

http://www.geekgumbo.com/2013/01/27/picking-wiki-software/
Another comparation of Wikis. As you can see, there isn't really much of a diffrence, except I would have to install another thing on the server. I don't think we really need that.

RE: Wiki - tomangelo - 01-07-2015

I've looked on wikimatrix comparision for features, that are build-in (or available as plugin), and not available on another.
DokuWiki have a Access Control List, CamelCase, Windows Shares, delayed indexing, support for Markdown, Textile, CREOLE, and even BBCode. Except that it has quoting, FAQ tags, abbreviations, support for mobile devices, blogs and tickets system and svg editing.
MediaWiki's advantages: more interface languages, most/least popular sites, Recent visitors and XML exporting.

RE: Wiki - Simbax - 01-07-2015

Markdown and support for mobile devices won it for me.

RE: Wiki - krzys_h - 01-07-2015

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: Access Control List
We don't need that

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: CamelCase
I'm sure that's possible somehow. I know it's definitely possible to force MediaWiki to start the title with a lowercase letter.

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: Windows Shares
Who would need that? WINDOWS shares? Nope.

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: delayed indexing
Not really needed

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: support for Markdown, Textile, CREOLE, and even BBCode
That's bad in my opinion. We don't want every page to use diffrent styling tags.

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: quoting
It's not needed, wiki is not a forum

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: FAQ tags
Okay, that could be useful

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: abbreviations
MediaWiki probably also has that as an extension, I don't think we need that

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: support for mobile devices
MediaWiki also can do that somehow Wink http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colobot

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: blogs
We don't need a blog

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: tickets system
Like GitHub's issues for a wiki? Not really needed in our case.

(01-07-2015, 08:59 PM)tomangelo Wrote: svg editing
That's an interesting thing. I'll have to check that out


Summing up, nothing we couldn't live without. For me DokuWiki still is just another thing to configure for no reason. We have properly configured multilingual MediaWiki (it took me a while to do it the way it's currently done).

PS. I've found a bug in quick quote plugin! You can highlight text in one person's post and click quote button next to other post and it'll assume your selected text is from the post you clicked the button on.
PS2. Those quotes made this post really long...

RE: Wiki - Simbax - 01-07-2015

Install cool theme, make navigation as good as in DokuWiki, get support for mobile devices and maybe install better online editor (it's even removing whitespaces making the code look cleaner -.-) and I will change my vote, but now doing anything on (our) MediaWiki is very painful for me.

I think I'm gonna install DokuWiki by myself on some free hosting and see the difference for real. Maybe it looks good only on paper, I don't know.

RE: Wiki - krzys_h - 01-07-2015

Already installed for testing Wink http://dev.krzysh.pl/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=wiki:welcome

RE: Wiki - Simbax - 01-07-2015

https://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:indexmenu <- this. This is awesome. Is there something like that for MediaWiki?

RE: Wiki - krzys_h - 01-07-2015

(01-07-2015, 09:43 PM)Simbax Wrote: Install cool theme
Find a cool theme? Or make a cool theme in TerranovaTeam colors? We'll se
(01-07-2015, 09:43 PM)Simbax Wrote: make navigation as good as in DokuWiki
What do you mean by "good navigation"? I think actually MediaWiki has better navigation, e.g. the sidebar.
(01-07-2015, 09:43 PM)Simbax Wrote: get support for mobile devices
That's not a problem https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MobileFrontend
(01-07-2015, 09:43 PM)Simbax Wrote: maybe install better online editor
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Category:WYSIWYG_extensions Please select one you like the look of the most.
(01-07-2015, 09:43 PM)Simbax Wrote: it's even removing whitespaces making the code look cleaner -.-
I've just checked, it doesn't do anything like that...

RE: Wiki - Simbax - 01-07-2015

(01-07-2015, 10:09 PM)krzys_h Wrote: Find a cool theme? Or make a cool theme in TerranovaTeam colors? We'll se

I couldn't find any non-luscious theme for MediaWiki, whereas DokuWiki looks fine by default.

(01-07-2015, 10:09 PM)krzys_h Wrote: What do you mean by "good navigation"? I think actually MediaWiki has better navigation, e.g. the sidebar.

http://colobot.info/forum/showthread.php?tid=516&pid=5618#pid5618

(01-07-2015, 10:09 PM)krzys_h Wrote: That's not a problem https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MobileFrontend

Good. However, I would feel more comfortable if this was a built-in feature instead of an extension.

(01-07-2015, 10:09 PM)krzys_h Wrote: Please select one you like the look of the most.

None of the listed satisfy me sadly, but:

This is our editor: http://i.imgur.com/WEaBZ6I.png
This is (apparently) default MediaWiki editor: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WikiEditor#mediaviewer/File:VectorEditorBasic-en.png

Is there something I don't know or what.

(01-07-2015, 10:09 PM)krzys_h Wrote: I've just checked, it doesn't do anything like that...

Maybe the editor itself gives me feeling that something is broken every time I edit random page Smile

(01-07-2015, 09:57 PM)krzys_h Wrote: Already installed for testing

Nice, I'm gonna give it a try in the next few days.

RE: Wiki - tomangelo - 01-07-2015

(01-07-2015, 10:43 PM)Simbax Wrote: krzys_h Wrote: That's not a problem https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MobileFrontend


Good. However, I would feel more comfortable if this was a built-in feature instead of an extension.

Well, in DokuWiki this is a plugin too, not build-in feature (at least that's written on the comparision page).