Wiki vs HTML Editor

[korbeysellen]

About 2 years ago (before I took over the KB), my director made the decision to move off of the HTML Editor and convert the entire KB to Wiki.   Given some big initiatives I want to implement in the next year, I'm starting to think that moving back to HTML will be hugely beneficial.   I'm meeting with him in a couple of days to discuss the pros and cons for each.   His key reasons, that he briefly told me, for moving to Wiki were because of limitations for the HTML editor and the table of contents you are able to build with Wiki.

What are your key reasons for using whichever method you use?   From what I see, most people are on HTML.   I'd like to go into the meeting being able to speak on both points but don't know much.

[StephLindorff]

I chose HTML for because I could "get under the hood" and manually code the results I needed.

[SimonDunsmoor]

We are going to start with the HTML as I think it will allow us more freedom in the long run, like Stephanie Lindorff mentioned.

[servicenowkevin]

We're using the HTML editor mostly. There's a few teams that prefer the wiki editor, but the Tech Editors on the KM team like the flexibility of getting into the HTML. There are pros to using both, so it really depends on what you're planning to do.

[katherinejones]

Kevin,

Let's assume that 80% of those that create knowledge do not have HTML skills sets and therefore getting under the hood is not a requirement for them, but I do have some that have that expertise and have chosen to go that route.  

What are the pro's/con's to HTML vs. Wiki?   I ask because I am thinking about hiding the Article Type field (defaulting to HTML) so that users don't have to wonder which value to select.

Thanks!