Andrew's dashboard

Tim replied on June 11, 2008 17:37 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

Nathan Schmidt whipped up a quick pbwiki 2.0 API call for rendering wikistyle text into html, and I used that to create a classic editor for 2.0 wikis.

instructions for putting it on your wiki can be found here:

http://getsatisfaction.com/pbwiki/top...

Tim replied on May 22, 2008 21:15 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

Interesting point about the lack of wikistyle making the site more like something like geocities...

Going to the Oxford English Dictionary definition of a wiki: A type of web page designed so that its content can be edited by anyone who accesses it, using a simplified markup language.

pbwiki definately is straying away from being a true wiki.

Matt replied on May 21, 2008 06:31 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

So I just started playing with PBWiki today and I agree that the lack of WikiStyle is a real hinderance for people who write long documents - which is much easier to do offline in a simple text editor. Sure, writing docs offline and then uploading in one giant shot isn't very collaborative, but that's how a lot of things get started.

I understand the issue with WYSIWYG editors destroying WikiStyle (I've seen this with Confluence, SocialText, MediaWiki, etc.) but that seems solvable by constraining edits to what you can do in WikiStyle if the admin chooses to support that.

A comment on the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

glad to see that you're taking the "expert user experience" into account since that's what everybody becomes eventually if they use your product as much as you'd like them to... Can't wait to see this stuff go in.... the return of mobile support will be awesome too... when I first started using pbWiki I read and updated it all the time through the web browser in my PSP... but those days are gone, and it'll be exciting if they return. – Tim, on May 16, 2008 20:46

ms0815 replied on May 16, 2008 19:39 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

I'm also loving the classic editor, especially creating links is extremely fast.
I use a private wiki with over 100 pages and over 1000 links, links are the core of my wiki and beeing forced to use the new editor would be really a problem.

It's not only the time you need more when using the mouse for links (even shortcuts are much slower and more intricate than classic editor) - the problem is the bad feeling everytime you make a link that it was much easier in the past and that is now called "improvement".

I know there is a problem that the classic formatting gets "destroyed" when someone uses the new editor once - so you can't relly switch back anymore then.
But why don't you make the new editor default and an option in the wiki settings to enable also classic editor which the wikiadmin can turn on and set write permissions to pages so that someones "classic" pages don't get broken.
At least on a private wiki classic editor should be available !

Guy Fawkes marked one of Andrew's replies in PBwiki as useful. Andrew replied to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?". Guy Fawkes and 3 other people think it's one of the best replies.

Andrew's reply to "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" was just promoted to the most useful! Adrexia and 3 other people think it's one of the best replies.

I've used your site on and off over a few years for note-taking for my Open University courses here in the UK. So I was interested to take a look at your new V2 Beta. Initial impressions:
* Looks nice
* Mmmmmmmmmm, like that side bar
* Nice editor

So how do I switch into Wiki markup for edits? Oh, I can't :-(

As far as I can tell, you have created an editor for HTML - I can even switch into HTML mode and type HTML direct.

So - what's my problem?

Well - one of the points of a Wiki is to provide a quick and simple mark-up language. If I wanted to write HTML, I would write HTML. I could just use your editor, but:
* how do I do this on the train when I have no connection?
* how do I draft out the outline of a series of pages when I can't type in the links for pages to be created later?
* where is the CamelCase that allowed me to link pages in the fastest way I have ever seen?
* how, if my site is public, do I stop people putting malicious code on my pages, if I need them to be editable?

You could have produced a nice editor - but why not an editor for Wiki Markup, rather than HTML?

I think this is one step forward, but two large steps back.

Adrexia replied on April 02, 2008 02:01 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

I miss WikiStyle too. WYSIWYG is the devil. It's so much more complicated and time consuming than just typing what you want on to the page. I don't get the point.

Guy Fawkes replied on March 31, 2008 10:22 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

"losing that style of editing causes the service to no longer really be a wiki. It's just HTML pages (a la geocities) with a built in HTML editor."

Thank you.

dccircuit marked one of Andrew's replies in PBwiki as useful. Andrew replied to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?". dccircuit and 3 other people think it's one of the best replies.

dccircuit replied on March 31, 2008 03:20 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

I agree with Guy and others who are upset to see Wiki markup disappear. To me, losing that style of editing causes the service to no longer really be a wiki. It's just HTML pages (a la geocities) with a built in HTML editor.

Something that I like about wiki markup is the limiting factor that it puts on layout. As well as some of the automatic features such as creating tables of contents for the Headings on the page. This also allowed for anchors for each of those headings automatically. Of course, I might be recalling features that MediaWiki has and not PBwiki.

This strikes me as a difference between myspace and facebook in a way... Facebook was successful in part because it didn't let the user create super-ugly do anything-they-want-to pages. All Facebook pages follow the same formatting rules. Almost all myspace pages I've ever seen look terrible. Wiki markup when followed has a similar effect... It restrains craziness and focuses on the content.

I suggested PBwiki to a friend expecting him to be able to create real wiki pages on a real wiki service. I'm very disappointed to come look at the pages he made, click source, and see this inscrutable HTML appear behind the pages. I'm sorry to say that I regret recommending PBwiki now.

David E. Weekly replied on March 19, 2008 14:55 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

You're right that wikis need to be editable on limited devices like mobiles. We will be working on adding this support to 2.0 in the next few months. And don't forget, in the interim you can always use 1.0!

Bob replied on March 19, 2008 12:17 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

Does anyone know of a wiki provider that does support limited device access?

Stephen Fleming replied on March 19, 2008 02:46 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

I will miss CamelCase.

And I will miss not being able to edit wikis on limited devices (cellphones, Palms, etc.). I realize that's not a normal use case. But it works on 1.0, and apparently won't work on 2.0. That's a shame.

Vu Nguyen replied on March 17, 2008 20:28 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

I think the model for PBwiki 2.0 is to be more like a word processor, although you raise some interesting points, particularly concerning offline editing. A possible solution for that would be better integration into software such as Microsoft Word or OpenOffice, and that's something PBwiki is exploring.

I'm sorry I can't be of more help, but thanks for your suggestions!
Vu

Casey Greene marked one of Andrew's replies in PBwiki as useful. Andrew replied to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?". Casey Greene and 3 other people think it's one of the best replies.

Andrew replied on March 16, 2008 14:11 to the question "Is the Classic Editor supported in PBwiki 2.0?" in PBwiki:

I've used your site on and off over a few years for note-taking for my Open University courses here in the UK. So I was interested to take a look at your new V2 Beta. Initial impressions:
* Looks nice
* Mmmmmmmmmm, like that side bar
* Nice editor

So how do I switch into Wiki markup for edits? Oh, I can't :-(

As far as I can tell, you have created an editor for HTML - I can even switch into HTML mode and type HTML direct.

So - what's my problem?

Well - one of the points of a Wiki is to provide a quick and simple mark-up language. If I wanted to write HTML, I would write HTML. I could just use your editor, but:
* how do I do this on the train when I have no connection?
* how do I draft out the outline of a series of pages when I can't type in the links for pages to be created later?
* where is the CamelCase that allowed me to link pages in the fastest way I have ever seen?
* how, if my site is public, do I stop people putting malicious code on my pages, if I need them to be editable?

You could have produced a nice editor - but why not an editor for Wiki Markup, rather than HTML?

I think this is one step forward, but two large steps back.