Andrew Tsai Posted July 8, 2013 Posted July 8, 2013 Query about bridging MediaWiki and IPB on current site PCGamingWiki.com. May pay if necessary. May be opportunity for long term server administration as well. Currently there is a bridge between the Wiki and PHPBB3 as well as a number of other wikis such as this one. I had a person who managed my server and developed the initial Wiki and PHPBB3 bridge, but might not be able to maintain it in the future. I’m deprecating PHPBB3 in favour of IP Board because of its more powerful features. The main objective is to link the accounts, so a user can use the same credentials to login to IP Board and the wikis. I intend to set up IP Board on the subdomain http://community.pcgamingwiki.com. Single sign on (between pcgamingwiki.com and community.pcgamingwiki.com) with cookies is nice to have, but low priority.
Graphite Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 I use this: sourceforge.net/projects/ipbwiki/?source=navbar Development is rather slow though. You might want to contact the developers. I have it running on IPB 3.4 and MW 1.18 EDIT: il also point out that it shares users and has configurable roles for forum groups
opentype Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 If you switch your forum to IB.Board, you could also consider moving your MediaWiki content to IP.Content. My site used to consist of a bridged PHPBB3 and MediaWiki once, too. But now I really enjoy having a seamless experience for all content.
Graphite Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 If you switch your forum to IB.Board, you could also consider moving your MediaWiki content to IP.Content. My site used to consist of a bridged PHPBB3 and MediaWiki once, too. But now I really enjoy having a seamless experience for all content. I was going to point out the wiki features of IPC, but the glaring omission of a way to make the info box templates that MediaWiki uses.
opentype Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 The IP.Content wiki function doesn't need info boxes within a record, because IP.Content itself provides all flexibility to set up the databases themselves with all the fields you would put in boxes in MediaWiki. And you have all the flexibility to display the fields however you like through the database list/view templates. That’s actually much more sophisticated and user-friendly than requiring the Wiki authors to mess with template code within every record.
Andrew Tsai Posted July 15, 2013 Author Posted July 15, 2013 I use this: sourceforge.net/projects/ipbwiki/?source=navbar Development is rather slow though. You might want to contact the developers. I have it running on IPB 3.4 and MW 1.18 EDIT: il also point out that it shares users and has configurable roles for forum groups Hi thanks I have seen this project, but the person initially working on the integration said that a lot needing updating for it to work on MediaWiki 1.19.2. Do you think it would be a great deal of work? Thanks for the input @opentype, do you have an example site you can link to show the wiki features you are describing in IP Board? I'm interested in seeing how it looks. The thing we would miss the most about moving from MediaWiki would be the infobox type templates. We are also beginning to migrate our templates to Semantic MediaWiki which gives a lot more options in displaying lists, and we also use bots to do mass edits in templates.
opentype Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 I'm interested in seeing how it looks. That's the beauty of it. It can look however you like. ;-) A list view: http://www.talkchelsea.net/players/ A record view: http://www.talkchelsea.net/players/_/branislav-ivanovic A very different list view on my site: http://www.typografie.info/3/page/werkschau.htm And a record view on my site: http://www.typografie.info/3/page/Schriften/fonts.html/_/graublau-sans-pro-r51 No one needs to deal with Wiki code. The users just fill forms (see image below), and the templates creates all the buttons, tables, graphics and so on however I like them to look. Since I use the IP.Content databases, much more users of my community create new Wiki content. MediaWiki code was just too complicated for many users.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.