Re: Wiki for musl?

[Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>]

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:09:47PM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 04:00:06PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> > 
> > I was thinking more along the lines of AJAX for realtime update of the
> > preview alongside the text (ala Stack Overflow), submission without
> > reloading the whole page, etc. Not just visual presentation of the
> > page.
> 
> There are such things possible with ikiwiki.  If your interested in
> current status, you can glance over the discussions on ikiwiki.info,
> such as http://ikiwiki.info/todo/mdwn_preview/ 
> 
> The specific feature you're talking about on stack overflow hsa been
> cloned a bunch of times in general-use libraries.  For an example of

I assume you're talking about the live preview. What about submitting
changes without reloading the page? To me that makes a big difference
in the usability impression - avoiding the discontinuity of the screen
disappearing for a second, the scrollbar getting reset, etc.

> that, see http://code.google.com/p/pagedown/source/browse/ -- which can
> be shoved into just about any wiki program.  (incidentally, ikiwiki uses
> markdown by default, but any (or multiple) markup compilers can be used.
> the traditional 'easy' setup involves a post-commit hook on the server
> that triggers a recompile of the wiki whenever someone checks in the
> source.)

Nice, so it's all static aside from edits?

> The default ikiwiki theme and css is very sparse, but there are quite a
> few drop-in replacements for them that look fancy and ajaxy.  

It's not that I want things to "look ajaxy". I don't mind if they look
like the first websites from the early 90s with no styling, default
fonts, no custom buttons, etc., but I do like having a responsive
interface without discontinuities. For pure static content broken into
logical pages, I'm perfectly happy without any ajax, but if the site
is something interactive/editable or an "application" of sorts, I
don't like it to feel like a second-class citizen in the world of
applications.

> Please keep in mind that lots of people still don't like using this sort
> of thing.  For the record, I'm one of them.  

Graceful fallback to non-AJAX when JS is disabled (or in browsers that
don't support JS) is of course a requirement for an accessible site.

Rich