Related to all this... I am planning to use Mediawiki to build a website that allows collaborative edition, but aimed to everybody (including users that only know to use Internet, and barely).
I doubt between integrate with KBabel or other .po editor free source, or build a new editor, but it seems for your sayings that they should learn marks, and that that's not the idea..although it would be brief texts without bold nor that things.
Better integrate Mediawiki with external editors (free source also) is best solution, not only in my case, but also generallly?
Thanks
Jordi
Quoting Jan Steinman Jan@Bytesmiths.com:
On 14 Mar 2005, at 13:53, Rowan Collins wrote:
Well, *extremely* early on in the development of wiki software, the choice was made to favour *simplicity*... you were just typing text with the odd CamelCaseLinkPattern in.
So let people enter plain text! What's wrong with that? Why must EVERY USER be a graphic artist? (I assure you, they are not!)
With the exception of [[square brackets]] instead of CamelCase, one can use MediaWiki in pretty much the same way as one uses c2.com, no?
The only exception I can bring to mind is if unsophisticated users are interested in correcting typos in heavily-marked-up text. And if that's the case, nothing short of a full WYSIWYG authoring environment is going to do the job. (Those who are seeking "full WYSIWYG", take a look at GoLive or Dreamweaver. Do you really want to turn THAT loose on your unsophisticated users?)
Page authors should either assume THEY are going to be doing 95% of the maintenance, on they should KISS the complications goodbye, and make it inviting for less sophisticated users.
:::: Sell your cleverness, and purchase bewilderment -- Rumi :::: Jan Steinman http://www.Bytesmiths.com/Item/99-6313-15
MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l