Re: This Wiki Implementation

[Petite Abeille <petite_abeille@...>]

On Feb 22, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Philippe Lhoste wrote:

> Personally, I wouldn't mind to change markup, I know Markdown, and  
> nearly each wiki has its own rules anyway.

Yes, Markdown is rather well thought out.

> To answer your first question, see http://lua-users.org/wiki/WikiHelp

Ok.

> As a user, I don't find it very intuitive, I just expect a good old  
> Edit link... "Hiding" functionalities isn't a hot idea, IMHO.

Well... arguably... there is nothing intuitive about any software...  
one simply gets used to them... in this case, it's not 'hidden', but  
rather 'progressing'... in other words, various functionalities are  
presented when needed, instead of upfront... furthermore, there is  
only one 'action': click on the title... of course, ymmv...

> Just check it... http://lua-users.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?action=editprefs
>
> You can make less anonymous edits, choose a time zone to display the  
> dates (would be nice to be able to choose date format too), size of  
> edit area and some styling choices, and options for viewing history.

I see. Too fancy for my personal taste :)

> Mmm? I believe HTML should be deactivated (escaped) in a wiki, or at  
> least strictly controlled.

Right... I'm slowly coming to that conclusion as well... at least  
regarding a public wiki... an intranet wiki is another matter  
though... as one will tend to trust its own users a bit more...

> I don't want to find a YouTube video on a wiki page (unless allowed  
> by the wiki owner) or iframes or such.
> So if all pages are fully generated, they could/should adhere to Web  
> standards.

Yes, once one remove the ability for the users to add free form html,  
then all the page should be fully validating.

> That illustrates the problem of not escaping HTML. Invalid HTML  
> typed by user breaks page.

Fair enough... the upcoming version of Nanoki will have free form HTML  
turned off by default.

> I see in the edit page:
>
> ATTENTION if your purpose is SEO / search engine optimization /  
> pageranking:
>
>    * any sites you link to will be added to a blacklist used by a  
> network of wiki's

What black list specifically? Is such a list used for incoming IP  
filtering a well?

>    * inappropriate links will be promptly removed

That's part of wiki 'gardening' right?

>    * this wiki's page history and diffs are not crawled by search  
> engines

So anything related to edits is marked as 'noindex' or such, right?

Additionally, Nanoki marks page that have changed recently (i.e. in  
the last 24 hours) as 'noindex'. Once the changes have stabilized, the  
page is made available for indexing.

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DelayedIndexing

> First impression (home page) on the wiki: looks clean. But I am not  
> fan of light gray links, I would use this color for visited links  
> instead. Now, that's a question of taste, and perhaps because I use  
> this color for comments in my code... Just a minor quibble.

Yes, the default link color palette seems to be, hmmm, problematic to  
some :)

a:link      { color: rgb( 153, 153, 153 ); text-decoration: none; }
a:visited   { color: rgb( 102, 102, 102 ); text-decoration: none; }
a:hover     { color: rgb( 051, 051, 051 ); text-decoration: none; }
a:active    { color: rgb( 204, 204, 204 ); text-decoration: none; }

http://dev.alt.textdrive.com/browser/HTTP/etc/custom-screen.css

Any proposal to change those colors, while keeping them understated,  
warmly welcome :)

Thanks for the feedbacks!

Cheers,

PA.