Loading...
 
Print

fatal tikiwiki flaw

This page had to be restored in 2005 following sysop vandalism apparently by Jason Diceman?.

Any of these could be considered a fatal tikiwiki flaw making it desirable to migrate openpolitics.ca itself and Livingplatform.ca itself to another platform without the flaw, e.g. GetWiki or an improved mediawiki.

1. inability to enforce naming conventions in common with Wikinfo/Wikipedia due to lack of commas and apostrophes in the page names - disaster - there are over one million pages in fifty languages using conventions worked out by those projects, accordingly, we are cut off from that whole corpus and have to munge names with some kind of name-munging AI just to import text. See GFDL corpus namespace for a detailed overview of why this simply can't be addressed by "fixes" using tikiwiki.

2. incompatible wikitext ignoring de facto standards set by mediawiki and GetWiki - wikistyle - in the aforementioned over one million articles in over fifty languages. See naming conventions for international Green Party policy for an example of the kind of mindless stupidity implied by failing to recognize double-square-bracket notation, coloned subspaces as per GFDL corpus namespace.

NOTE: There is talk in TikiWiki development to make the syntax modular and thus "could" match Wikipedia/mediawiki - in theory, someday, maybe. However moinmoin? had this ability since day one with its "parser market" and there has never been a project to meet the de facto wikitext standard set by mediawiki. The answer is always "do it yourself" which seems to prove that there is absolutely no will in the technology-driven projects to actually enable use of the largest mass of content. This will almost certainly be the same with tikiwiki, which is likewise geek-run.

3. social software lacks:

3a. poor monitoring of recent Changes - in particular the comments and editor are only visible when "hovering" - vs. mediawiki providing up to 255 characters per edit to explain what was done

3b. arbitrary separation of Comments? from Changes;

3c. non-existent support for User pages, e.g. signing.

3d. inferior watchlist support

NOTE: "Last changes" and ""last comments" are both standard modules on Tiki, however, they are poorly integrated with all other features. You can see this at "Recent Changes" in the bottom of the "Help Links" box to the right:

4. content management lacks

4a. lack of watchlist facilities to watch pages of interest to a given user; Logged in users can turn on watches of changes and comments on any page, but, this falls short of the mediawiki facility which creates a positive watchlist and related changes? to make it easy to monitor whole areas.

4b. poor handling of redirects, for instance, failure to track abbreviations or subpages as a more general case of reference to sections within pages, e.g. links to IETF should show up on the backlinks? to Internet Engineering Task Force.

4c. as a consequence of 4b, lack of what links here integrating all redirected pages to simulate typed links, e.g. reports like "as of 2005" created automatically just by redirecting pages like "as of 2005-03", losing neither the anchor nor the reference from the list, without manual updates that waste time.

5. no XML feed import making it impossible to simply customize existing articles while letting them change until the last possible moment, e.g. as Wikinfo mirrors Wikipedia except for under 30,000 diffs where Wikinfo has improved on Wikipedia.

5a. Tikiwiki's RSS feed options fall far short of GetWiki's ability to simply mirror an entire mediawiki or GetWiki service with web framing - close to Project Xanadu? capability, whch is the ultimate to which hypertext aspires...

6. no chat integration by contrast the interwiki identity standard? will probably be jabber.org

7. poor architecture and astonishingly bad feedback mechanisms, e.g. incomprehensible http://tikiwiki.org(external link) site, impossible for an end user even to submit bug report?s.

NOTE: Bugs can submitted to SourceForge if you are 7a. SourceForge user 7b. willing to negotiate the horrific SourceForge UI about which even geeks complain 7c. totally uninterested in ever finding out how high priority your report has been. Seedwiki is better in all these respects, and mediawiki is getting better too. GetWiki being maintained by one person it also is somewhat more responsive.

8. No vote facility general enough to apply to page edits, e.g. to score them as with comments.

9. General stupidity of tikiwiki developers regarding "what a wiki really is". No concept of REST protocol? norms, which are well understood by moinmoin?ers. Absolute lack of concern about overly complex UIs or self-defeating features.



Show php error messages