

Wagn: a new breed of wiki - pheade
http://www.wagn.org/

======
VanL
They reinvented Zope -- Zope 2, specifically. (<http://www.zope.org/the-world-
of-zope>)

Lets see:

* Each item has a name, check.

* Items can include other items by name, check.

* Through-the-web editing, check.

* Integrated user/role management, check.

* Custom query language, check.

They are still waiting on adding a NoSQL db, I expect that will come soon.

------
bengillies
It looks remarkably similar to TiddlyWiki (<http://tiddlywiki.com>). Any
influence there or...

(Disclaimer: I work for Osmosoft (who make TiddlyWiki))

~~~
jgmmo
I love TiddlyWiki! Great work guys, it has allowed me to create very simple
and manageable process documentation for coworkers.

~~~
b_emery
I'll second this. IMO it has raised the bar so high for a personal wiki that
I'm reluctant to look into others.

~~~
nyellin
Have you tried org-mode? It's not a traditional wiki, but I switched recently
and am very happy.

(org-mode supports everything you would expect from a wiki, links included)

------
atacrawl
I hate to be harsh, but the design is so amateurish that it's hard to take it
seriously.

~~~
coliveira
The original wiki also had an amateurish design, which didn't stop it from
being interesting.

~~~
k33n
Are you referring to Wikipedia?

~~~
buro9
WikiWikiWeb

[http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2010/03/0325wikiwikiweb-f...](http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2010/03/0325wikiwikiweb-
first-wiki/)

~~~
k33n
Ah, good old 1995. When nobody cared about design and C++ was amazing.

------
sophacles
So... it's a CMS?

Ok that may be a bit of a snarky way to say it, but this doesn't really seem
much different than a CMS -- a CMS that doesn't necessarily have the baggage
of the old stalwarts, but not that different.

Am I missing something?

~~~
troymc
A typical wiki is a collection of pages, with each page containing an
unstructured blob of text.

Wikis like Wagn and Semantic Mediawiki are an attempt to find a middle ground
between a typical wiki (where each content page is unstructured) and a
database-driven CMS (where each content page is a view of a row of a
database).

The idea is that you get the benefits of a wiki, where you can build as you
go, plus the benefits of a database, because you can add structure (new fields
in content pages) as you need it. The added structure gives you the ability to
create new pages using queries (e.g. a list of all country names in Africa),
rather than manually (as is the case for a typical "List of ____" page on
Wikipedia).

------
kordless
I'm sorry, but the themes you have are pretty bad. Part of being a wiki is
making the words the primary focus. I'm distracted by large green borders with
yours.

~~~
rufugee
When did HN become a design review site? I understand giving helpful pointers
to a startup, but Wagn isn't a startup...it's a free utility.

Don't dismiss it because of the look. It's a pretty powerful system once you
get your head around it (which can take a bit of effort).

~~~
Cushman
If _users_ will dismiss it because of the look, it'd be negligent for one of
us not to point that out. Your parent was polite, if short. Who comes to HN
for handholding?

------
sciurus
It looks like this has been out since 2009.

From [http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2009/06/wagn-
blazes-a...](http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2009/06/wagn-blazes-a-
bold-new-trail-in-wiki-software.php) : "Created by the non-profit Grass
Commons and jump-started by a grant from the Meyer Memorial Trust, Wagn has
been quietly honed into a tool that breaks new ground in collaborative
software. What makes Wagn special is that it takes the wiki that you know and
adds database structure and functionality. Also a simple CMS, Wagn can handle
data like no wiki you've ever seen."

~~~
mlinksva
1.0 since 2009, but has been around longer than that.
<https://github.com/wagn/wagn/blob/master/CHANGELOG> back to 2007, but I
vaguely [mis?]recall hearing about it before then.

------
zipdog
The big improvement is the way 'cards' can be included in other cards? I think
that has some interesting potential, particularly the way you can include a
card open, closed, or just as a link (a summary option would be good too but I
didn't see it there)

<http://www.wagn.org/wagn/inclusions>

------
swah
This looks like Smalltalk. Todos foge!

