Re: RE: Thoughts on Twiki

Erik

We understand that CamelCaps are not well regarded by many.  And we 
recognize that the initial implementation of our tools will not be 
perfect.  We're hoping that people can cope with CamelCaps well enough 
to participate.  If that turns out not to be the case then we will of 
course have to reconsider.

Even if a twiki implementation turns out to be acceptable to most of the 
community, I'm sure our tools will evolve over time.  Perhaps into the 
type of wiki you envision, perhaps into another tool altogether.    

Mitchell

Erik Moeller wrote:

>On Die, 2002-12-17 at 02:58, Chih-Chao Lam wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Twiki's link syntax can be at:
>>http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/TWiki/TextFormattingRules
>>and is similar but not identical to Wikipedia.
>>    
>>
>
>Alas, from the description it looks like TWiki is inherently tied to
>CamelCase -- even when you create a free link, it links to a CamelCase
>page.  [[foo bar]] points to FooBar and so on. As a result, you get ugly
>CamelCase links rendered all over the place -- just browse TWiki and you
>see stuff like "TWikiUpgradeTo01Dec2001." Ugh. I also find it notable
>that the TWiki wiki has about one change per day -- my own small
>infoAnarchy wiki is larger than that.
>
>Choosing free links, and providing a very easy user interface (without
>sign on) is the secret of Wikipedia's success. That's why they have
>nearly 100,000 articles, that's why people from all fields of expertise
>participate. CamelCase is the reason wikis never really caught on when
>they were invented in 1995. It's too bad that OSAF will repeat this
>original mistake.
>
>Regards,
>
>Erik
>  
>



_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "Process" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/process