Re: [Phpwiki-talk] WYSIWIKI

[Manuel V. <man...@gm...>]

2005/10/19, Dan Frankowski <dfr...@cs...>:
> - Do it in a way so people don't have to hit an "edit" or "save" button
> anymore (!!). It just auto-saves every few seconds (to the same
> revision, so it doesn't create huge numbers of revisions)
>
> Some limitations to be solved, with proposals for solutions for each:
>
> - Lack of plugin support
> - HTML vulnerability

I don't see why doubleclick on textarea to edit is more obvious than
click on an 'edit' button. A wiki is not a text editor like OpenOffice
Writer or Microsoft Word, it can be dangerous to try to hide this fact
to people, all the more since they are not confident with wiki
approach.

But this work is intresting, I think there are 2 ways that can easily
solve the current limitations:
* generate wiki markups instead of HTML
* keep the current 'edit' button and allow section edition.

For the first one, I think the objective of Scott (one wysiwyg
front-end to run them all) is not a good one because the current state
is: *there are differencies between wiki syntax*. So, adoption of
wysiwiki imply a modification of something somewhere:
* You can adapt the server to try to validate the submitted XML/HTML.
* You can adapt the client to be able to take in account different wiki mar=
kups.
I believe the second one is much safe and much acceptable for engine
maintainers than the first one.

The second proposition is to provide a "mix" between mediawiki and
gmail approach. From mediawiki, the section edition is really useful,
expecially on large documents. From gmail I take the 'edit inline'.

Now let's imagine: you are reading a large document, you want to edit
a small paragraph, just click on 'edit section' (mediawiki) you get a
wysiwyg interface (wysiwiki) instead of the current paragraph *with
other sections around* (gmail). You can now make your changes, save it
and continue reading the text without reloading the page (ajax).
Obviously, the legacy edit mode (without buzz technology) should be
always available.

I don't know if I was clear enough.
Is this proposition acceptable ?

-- Manuel