How do we make our wiki look like our website?

Will there be documentation about EXACTLY how to go about this? (For example, WHERE to upload the wiki.css file, and how to make sure it's "hooked" to the wiki.)

Since they haven't implemented folders for uploaded files, there's only one place to upload them, so that's not an issue. Similarly, if you have a Platinum wiki, it's automatically "hooked" into the wiki as soon as you upload it. (That applies to 1.0; they haven't rolled out premium features for 1.0 wikis, but I'm guessing it will work the same).

The real work will be learning all the CSS classes and IDs used in a wiki page, what they represent, and how changes to them affect the look and feel for your wiki. There's little documentation for that in 1.0, but that doesn't matter, because 1.0 is going away. They haven't mentioned docs for CSS in 2.0, but I'm sure it will be forthcoming, as they progress with the beta rollouts.

Bottom line: you can spend a lot of time making a 1.0 site look like your website, but it will all be wasted when you eventually go to 2.0; you can start doing it for 2.0, but, since it's in beta, I wouldn't guarantee that anything you learn about the CSS internals isn't going to change in the next few months.

Hope this helps.

I'm truly sorry to interrupt here but as far as I understand you will never have to upgrade to 2.0 if you don't want to. See PBwiki Representative's statement: "we still won't cut off your 1.0 wikis and we don't plan to - ever".

Golly, my bad. But that doesn't change much. They have also committed to dropping support at some point, which means that any improvements from this point forward will be to 2.0 only, and someday they'll stop fixing bugs. I'd venture to say they're not terribly concerned with fixing existig bugs in 1.0 for the same reason. The sparse documentation for 1.0 CSS will likely never be updated or expanded, and it would be unwise for a university to place all their eggs in an unsupported basket.

1.0 is fine (even critical) for technically-oriented hacker types, but I would say that 2.0 is probably more suitable for the OP.

To be honest, I don't care about 1.0 bug fixes, it's working perfectly for me! Thanks PBwiki!
I believe most 1.0 bugs are in Point-and-Click editor and other 1.0 features I don't use or have a workaround for.
As long as the render engine isn't changed, current features stay in place & current workarounds keep working, great or better: awsome!
For some 1.0 wikis it's too much hassle to migrate to 2.0: no support (so far ...) for iframe and style tags, no wikilets. Bummer. Maybe in the future? Hopefully!
And I will use 2.0 of course, but differently.

Anybody with CSS experience is free to experiment with 2.0's classes and id's, of course, but they probably won't be stable until general release (although there are only a few things I could see changing). For those who would hire out somebody to skin their site, I would only go forward with it in 1.0 if I was planning on a redo later this year. Otherwise, I would personally wait for 2.0's general release and skin that instead.