[pmwiki-users] Selecting a Wiki engine...

[Mark Trumpold]

What is the ETA on this current development?


On 3/10/06 9:07 PM, "Henrik Bechmann" <henrik.bechmann at sympatico.ca> wrote:

> I personally think the thing to do is wait until your current round of
> development is over, and then revisit the whole subject of hierarchies
> in consideration of all the tools available. Yet another opportunity for
> a magazine article!
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - Henrik
> 
> Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 12:22:54PM -0400, Henrik Bechmann wrote:
>>   
>>> Patrick,
>>> 
>>> See http://wiki.splitbrain.org/wiki:namespaces
>>>     
>> 
>> Ahhh, I see.  They essentially manage this by avoiding the problem
>> of parent, ancestor, uncle, or cousin links -- i.e., you can
>> address pages at or below the current group, otherwise you have
>> to start at the root.
>> 
>> Could work.  It still has a bunch of issues in a PmWiki context,
>> however.  For example, a single name could be referring to either
>> a group or a page, and it's not clear how one would manage group
>> attributes.
>> 
>> (I can give a longer detailed list if people think it would
>> be helpful.)
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>>   
>>> Personally, I think it would be more fruitful (and less brittle) to
>>> think of the current PmWiki implementation as a *repository* of pages,
>>> with some way of structuring hierarchies on top of that with reference
>>> to the underlying repository.
>>>     
>> 
>> This is what categories, trails, and other items are intended to
>> help resolve.
>> 
>>   
>>> My hunch is that your page text vars may
>>> actually help in that regard (eg (:parentnode ParentGroup.PageName:)).
>>>     
>> 
>> I think you may be right -- I'm still learning what all is possible
>> within the context of page text vars.
>> 
>> Pm
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   
>>> Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>>>     
>>>> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 08:11:25AM -0400, The Editor wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>       
>>>>> On 10/3/06, Thomas Voghera <thomasvoghera at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>    
>>>>>         
>>>>>>> - limitation to a two-level hierarchy (groups and pages)
>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>>            
>>>>>> Is this about how pages can be organized? carved in stone?
>>>>>>      
>>>>>>           
>>>>> But it is *possible* this hierarchy problem will be solved soon.
>>>>> There was a very long list discussion on the subject a few months
>>>>> back, and the resolution seemed to be there was not a simple way (yet)
>>>>> to adequately qualify relative links (and avoid resulting
>>>>> ambiguities).
>>>>>    
>>>>>         
>>>> It's possible but not likely.  I've spent a *lot* of time over the
>>>> past five years thinking about hierarchical group implementations,
>>>> and I don't like anything we've come up with better than the current
>>>> Group.Name system.
>>>> 
>>>> That said, this past week I heard through a couple of off-list
>>>> discussions that DocuWiki now has a good hierarchical grouping
>>>> system -- if someone wanted to check it out and report back it
>>>> might be worth looking at.
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>       
>>>>> I'm wondering if in the back of Pm's mind the new syntax for *$:vars
>>>>> was a step toward solving this problem.
>>>>>    
>>>>>         
>>>> Nope, I haven't consciously made a connection between vars and
>>>> hierarchical groups.  Sorry.
>>>> 
>>>> Pm
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> pmwiki-users mailing list
>>>> pmwiki-users at pmichaud.com
>>>> http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>       
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> Henrik Bechmann
>>> www.osscommons.ca
>>> www.bechmannsoftware.com
>>> Webmaster, www.dufferinpark.ca
>>> 
>>> 
>>>     
>> 
>>