I'll just say my experience with the Confluence WYSIWYG editor hasn't been
great. Now, partly, that might have been the fact that the one page I
tried using it on had been migrated from another wiki, so, to be fair, the
WYSIWYG editor was being presented with a challenge. But, from a user's
POV, I have to say, editing with a WYSIWYG editor on a wiki is like a
prank waiting for a punch line, and you, the well-meaning user, are the
punch line. If you don't want to be embarrassed, I highly recommend going
"advanced mode". :-)

That experience has lead me to approach most WYSIWYG editors with caution.
Don't trust 'em.
--
HARDY POTTINGER <[log in to unmask]>
University of Missouri Library Systems
http://lso.umsystem.edu/~pottingerhj/
https://MOspace.umsystem.edu/
"Time and accident are committing daily havoc on the originals of the
valuable historical and State papers deposited in our public offices. The
late war has done the work of centuries in this business. The last cannot
be recovered but let us save what remains not by vaults and locks which
fence them from the public eye and use in consigning them beyond the reach
of accident" --Thomas Jefferson





On 7/25/12 8:32 AM, "Sean Hannan" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>As an administrator of a Confluence installation, I have to say that I
>hate
>it.
>
>Confluence is fine if you are not going to be touching it or doing any
>kind
>of local customizations (hooking it into local auth, etc.). If that's the
>case, you should really be looking at the hosted version.
>
>I've found that Atlassian is frustrating to deal with for support. I ran
>into a bug in Confluence that has been an open ticket in their issue
>tracker
>for 6 years. Years. I've found upgrades to be a pain, generally, and
>sometimes Atlassian will be fast and furious with them and it's hard to
>keep
>up. And the longer you wait, the more painful the upgrades become.
>
>I don't deal with the money side of things, but I definitely think that we
>do not get what we pay for with Confluence.
>
>-Sean
>
>On 7/25/12 9:05 AM, "Nathan Tallman" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> That's what I'm worried about with MediaWiki. The syntax used when
>>creating
>> and editing pages isn't intuitive and I'm afraid people won't want to
>>use
>> it. I was hoping someone would recommend a wiki with more of a WYSIWYG
>>type
>> of editing interface. Was also hoping to stick with FLOSS, but perhaps I
>> should at least peak at Confluence.
>> 
>> Thanks for the input,
>> Nathan
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Nate Vack <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>>> If you're expecting "everyone" to create and edit pages,
>>> it will be very hard to get widespread adoption with it.
>>>