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.

[servicenowkevin]

The pros for us really centered around familiarity. All of the authors are familiar with HTML editors and know a little to a lot about HTML and CSS. It was the more natural fit for us.

Wiki would let you create anchors more easily I think, but it's been a long time since we used it all so I say I remember the pros/cons that well now.

[korbeysellen]

I got the blessing from my director to switch back to HTML.   Do any of you have documented standards for authoring content you'd be willing to share?  

[katherinejones]

Korbey, what was your business case for making the switch?   What are the benefits you see in doing this?

[StephLindorff]

We have a have styleguide that protects consistency and usability at a very granular level (eg "The only font color, besides black, is dark red (which is used sparingly).   The only background color for header rows on tables is silver" etc).

We let templates manage the higher level "look-n-feel" for different types of articles (Self Help, Help Desk, Process etc)

[katherinejones]

Stephanie, have you shared your styleguide?   I would like to leverage your formatting (and not re-invent the wheel).