Over the last while, I’ve had conversations with other technical communicators about using a wiki for documentation. Many have been interested and enthusiastic about the idea. Others, somewhat frigid.
But a question that a few of them asked was How do I get the documentation out of a wiki? My answer? Don’t worry about it.
If you’re putting your documentation on a wiki, you’re doing it for a reason. And that reason is to easily author, manage, maintain, and deliver documentation.
In this case, the wiki is the delivery method. It’s where customers will read and perhaps comment on the documentation. It’s where they’ll be sent when they press F1 or click the Help link in an application. It might even be where they find supplementary information like knowledge base articles and introductory material.
Why would you need to pull the information out of the wiki and put it in another format? The only example I can think of is if you need to baseline the a particular release of the documentation. That can easily be done.
Of course, should you feel the need to export the content on a wiki to another format that, too, can be done. Not all wikis are created equally in that regard, though. Some, like DokuWiki and Confluence, have good export capabilities — ODT (via a plugin) in the case of DokuWiki, and PDF or Word in the case of Confluence. You might want to check WikiMatrix for more information about other wikis.
But, as I said, getting content out of a wiki (especially if you’re using it to deliver documentation) shouldn’t be your biggest concern. That concern should be getting quality content into the wiki.
My saying this shouldn’t come as a surprise: a wiki isn’t the best tool for all documentation. If you need to reuse content, you can do that (to a limited extent) on a wiki. I discussed this in a previous post, and Sarah Maddox looked at how do this in Confluence.
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that a wiki is the best way in which to write and publish modular documentation that requires you to output to multiple formats or for multiple audiences. The latter can be done — write offline in a tool that supports topic-based authoring, then publish the documentation for various audiences to a namespace on a wiki. If you’re dealing with documentation for multiple audiences (or just multiple products), then the namespace is your friend. You can have individual silos on the wiki for each project and never their twains shall meet.
Thoughts? Experiences? Feel free to leave a comment.
Related posts:
8 Responses
Andy Oram
April 7th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
1FLOSS Manuals (http://flossmanuals.net/) has a pretty clean way to generate PDFs and even books that can be shipped on a print-on-demand basis. Discloser: I volunteer for FLOSS Manuals and am on their advisory board.
The point of this extra production step is that they can try to offer the best of the wiki and print worlds. The wiki is editable by anyone who takes a few seconds to sign up, and changes appear immediately. But someone in charge of each book goes over changes and vets them before producing the more stable, printable version.
jay m
April 7th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
2One of the primary purposes of a Wiki is to permit collaboration.
Wikis are generally simple, to allow easy contribution and updating.
It’s grossly wasteful to keep that community effort imprisoned in the Wiki.
As a delivery medium, it is great for some purposes.
Not so great for others.
Paper and PDF still has an important place in the world, and it’s shortsighted to forget that.
Scott
April 7th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
3@Andy
Thanks for the comment. I’m actually quite familiar with FM — even own printed versions of some of the books.
Unfortunately, not every wiki has the PDF export capabilities (or even close) of FM. And I’ve found over the last few years, more and more folks are looking online for docs and assistance.
To me, a printed manual isn’t the ultimate goal of documentation. Content comes first, followed by delivery. If its wiki only, wiki plus PDF, online help or any other combo so be it.
Sarah Maddox
April 7th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
4Hallo Scott
Great post! I think you’re 100% correct in saying that a wiki is not the ideal tool for every situation, and particularly when you need modular documentation and output to multiple formats. Wikis are great for collaboratively creating/updating documentation, and they’re great as the publication medium when your audience is primarily online.
As a wiki hugger
I’d love to see the wikis’ capabilities extended, in terms of more flexible and higher quality output. There are a number of initiatives under way, for wiki conversions to DocBook, DITA, better PDF, etc. We as tech writers can certainly encourage them and give them input about our requirements.
A quick note that Confluence also allows you to export to HTML, as well as PDF and Word. (Disclosure: I work at Atlassian, the creators of Confluence wiki.)
Thank you for linking to my post, and thanks for your always-interesting posts too.
Sarah
Scott
April 7th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
5@jay m
Good points. But why can’t a wiki be more than that? Sure, it’s a great collaborative environment (I’m sure we can both come up with dozens of examples). A wiki can also be a way of delivering user manuals and online help, it can be a personal content authoring and publishing environment (something I use one for), it can be a Web site or blog.
The collaborative aspect of the wiki doesn’t have to disappear when it’s used to deliver documentation. Think of every FOSS project out there that uses a wiki to generate community documentation. On the commercial side of the software development fence, Atlassian (the folks behind the Confluence wiki) deliver docs using Confluence. Recently, they opened those docs up to users.
As I wrote in my reply to Andy Oram’s comment: To me, a printed manual isn’t the ultimate goal of documentation. Content comes first, followed by delivery. If its wiki only, wiki plus PDF, online help or any other combo so be it.
Scott
April 7th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
6@Sarah
Thanks for the comment.
Unfortunately, not every wiki has Confluence’s export capabilities out of the box. And it can be a pain to set up the export features (if the wiki engine supports them). That’s one reason why I like DokuWiki — it has a nice ODT export filter.
Looking that the comments that this post I have to say that a wiki is whatever you want or need it to be (within reason, of course). In my life outside of DMN, I do quite a bit of writing using a wiki installed on my personal Web site. It’s gotten to the point where my daughter no longer says “Are you going to write in OpenOffice/Google Docs?” and instead says “Are you going to do writing on your wiki?”
jay m
April 7th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
7methinks we agree.
I’m anticipating better tools for linking pages, re-factoring content, and creating navigation such as
indexes
tables of content
tag lists/clouds
and other (to be imagineered) tools for wikis.
Scott
April 8th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
8@jay m
Hear, hear!
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
Leave a reply
Blogroll
Past Entries
Communications from DMN is proudly powered by WordPress - BloggingPro theme by: Design Disease