Logically related questions link
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Why mediawiki rather than wordpress ? | Why mediawiki rather than wordpress ? | ||
<div class="mw-collapsible-content"> | <div class="mw-collapsible-content"> | ||
− | Well, first | + | Well, first Mediawiki is actually being used by the team behind Wordpress |
− | (automattic) for their [https://developer.wordpress.org developer documentation] | + | ([https://automattic.com/ Automattic]) for their [https://developer.wordpress.org developer documentation] as proof of powerfulness of its features. |
− | Then, because the business model of | + | Then, because the business model of Mediawiki and Wordpress are completely different. |
Wordpress allows an easy use but as soon as you want to expand or complete your | Wordpress allows an easy use but as soon as you want to expand or complete your | ||
− | website you are pushed (or constrained) to paying solutions. | + | website you are pushed (or constrained) to adopt paying solutions. |
Mediawiki (as well as our platform) is completely free, including any desirable | Mediawiki (as well as our platform) is completely free, including any desirable | ||
advanced feature, at cost to deal yourself with the code (starting from wikicode | advanced feature, at cost to deal yourself with the code (starting from wikicode | ||
itself, and proceeding with the creation of dedicated extensions). | itself, and proceeding with the creation of dedicated extensions). | ||
− | Then, because the intrinsic anti-immediacy of | + | Then, because the intrinsic anti-immediacy of Mediawiki constrains the creation of quality of contents: dealing with the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Wikitext wiki text] (either created through the help of visual editor, or directly) on the one hand slows down the content creation, and on the other provides you with a set of formatting and structuring tools specifically aimed at quality and complexity. |
− | dealing with | + | Then because Mediawiki offers a strong versioning controlling and allows a collaborativeness that Wordpress is not able to offer: many people can work on the same content in the same time, and notwithstanding the integrity of the content is preserved, and you can access all the changes made by each of editors at any time. |
− | hand slows down the content creation, and on the other provides you with a | + | Finally because through the general design of our platform (where Mediawiki is used as back-end site) the presentation of the content (i.e. the appearance of the website) can be completely decoupled by the content itself: a part of your team can solely take care of contents, and their organization or pages structure, and another part of the team can design whatever data consumer querying the APIs, and to use the data and the semantic data returned by them, in any conceivable way, apart from creating client-side applications, of course for [https://d3js.org/ data visualization] as well. |
− | formatting and structuring tools. | ||
− | Then because | ||
− | Finally because through the general design of our platform (where | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
</div> | </div> |