JotSpot is a venture that was announced at the Web 2.0 conference last week. JotSpot aims to move Wiki technology into the realm of application development.
- Posted by: Dion Almaer
- Posted on: October 11 2004 10:35 EDT
Using a simple scripting markup, JotSpot allows you to create Forms. Forms bring structure to your wiki pages. Forms define fields such as "text," "date," "number", etc. And, pages can contain both structured and unstructured text.
JotSpot home page
How JotSpot is different
JotSpot video demo
- no online wiki? by thoff thoff on October 11 2004 12:18 EDT
- JotSpot: New tool to move Wiki tech into application development by Mike Stanley on October 11 2004 12:29 EDT
- JotSpot: New tool to move Wiki tech into application development by Mike Stanley on October 11 2004 12:30 EDT
- JotSpot: New tool to move Wiki tech into application development by Konstantin Ignatyev on October 11 2004 12:54 EDT
- XWiki can do forms today and allows programming inside pages by Ludovic Dubost on October 11 2004 15:05 EDT
- XWiki can do forms today and allows programming inside pages by Carlos Perez on October 11 2004 15:27 EDT
- JotSpot by Graham Spencer on October 11 2004 18:34 EDT
- Separating the UI from the data by Tracy Tondro on October 11 2004 19:30 EDT
- wiki platforms for situated software by patrick chanezon on October 13 2004 09:43 EDT
How can you take a wiki product seriously that
doesn't have a version to try on its
Wow!. This is definitely an unprecedented and innovative idea. Can't wait to see how much they charge for such innovation.
I don't mean to be such a sarcastic a**. I apologize. It's monday. Good luck guys!
Many thanks for providing this information How JotSpot is different
Quick note: VQWiki can be up and running in less than 30 seconds :)
JotSpot is good news for the notion of Application Wikis.. but it is important to note that the notion of applications inside the wiki is not news.. TWiki (http://www.twiki.org) has been providing this for a while though the architecture to handle this is not that good..
XWiki (http://www.xwiki.org) is a project that has taken the idea of application in the wiki and built an architecture for that. It is open-source (GPL), can be up and running in a few minutes and has many of the features JotSpot has and many others also.
Forms are stored in an embedded database using hibernate, can be designed using a web interface. There is a full API available (search, display, editing) inside wiki documents using velocity or groovy.
And you can create your own wiki in a minute on the wiki farm at http://www.xwiki.com
Check out the demos of the advanced features at:
Maybe you could interest a bunch of VCs to invest in your project. After all, didn't these guys raise $5m to build a Wiki!!?
I'm Graham Spencer, one of the founders of JotSpot. I'm a regular reader of the site, so it's nice to see our product discussed here.
We do in fact have a version to try on our website; it's just that because we're still in beta, we're requiring a signup process. We aren't stingy with invitations, if you'd like to try the product just send us an email and we'll provision an account for you. We'll provide a sandbox and allow one-click signup once we're out of beta.
It is true that TWiki has had forms for a long time, and their design was one source of inspiration for us. However, their implementation is not really tuned for storing, searching and reporting on structured data. I think Ludovic agrees on this point. We believe that our advances in structured data handling make JotSpot different in kind, not just in degree. But please try the product (or watch the video demo linked from the main article above) and decide for yourself.
XWiki is a very good system; we're trying to solve many of the same problems. As with TWiki comparisons, the best way to decide is to try the systems that interest you and choose the one that meets your needs.
Do you know what you pricing model is going to look like yet?
How would you compare Jotspot to, say, Atlassian's Confluence?
Confluence is a great product with a different delivery mechanism and a somewhat different goal. Confluence is delivered as packaged software, while JotSpot is hosted on our servers (with an appliance to be released after we're out of beta). Confluence's goal is to "help the team communicate: sharing information, collaborating on documents and brainstorming ideas, all in a single web-based location." Our goal is to help teams communicate, but also to help teams build situated software.
Re: pricing: beta accounts are currently free. Our initial pricing will be $5/user/month for the hosted version.
I am not sure we would be interested in a hosted version...
Pardon me stepping in with a home-brewn alternative: http://cocoondev.org/daisy/ You can download and install Daisy on your server.
Yes I agree TWiki has big limits, especially when you look at the architecture at the code.. I've been a 3 years users of TWiki at my previous company and did hit the limits many times. When deciding to work on Wikis, I realized a new architecture was needed to do applications in a Wiki.
Structure in Wiki pages.. Situated Software... ACL are forms applied to the page.. lot of similarities between JotSpot and XWiki ! The main difference being the open-source nature of XWiki..
I believe to make it a platform for application developpement this is really needed !
Once you move beyond linking documents (what wiki aims for) into claiming to develop applications (as JotSpot appears to claim), you hit the old Hypercard problem: separating the UI from the data. Real application data will include many-to-many associations and other constructs for which there isn't just one user interface. This leads to either unnatural UIs or weird data models, or both.
As with Hypercard, tho, probably good for apps with _very_ simple data models.
We aren't stingy with invitations,
No, just put up on the web site so
i can be overwhelmed with goodness.
I don't want to sign in. I don't
want to endure the promiss of easy
setup. I just want to see it and
use it now.
We've tried to address this issue through standard techniques: you can have multiple views for a single model. In our system, the form represents the view, and you can apply different forms to the same page to get different results. We use that approach throughout the system; for example, ACLs are modified by applying the ACL form to a specific page.
(This is one difference between our system and TWiki -- TWiki made an explicit decision to only support one form per page.)
We have successfully built apps with reasonably rich data models (you can install some of them from our application gallery), so I believe we can go farther than Hypercard. However, we'll be the first to admit that we are not the tool of choice for highly complicated data models.
I did not ask for an invite at jotspot but looking at the very well done jotspot demo it seems to be treading the same waters as Ludovic's xWiki, which I've played with and like a lot (disclaimer, I'm a friend of Ludovic).
This is going to an interesting competition:-)
I've expanded my views about why wikis providing scripting and an object store can provide the most simple application platform for situated software at Open Source Get Together in Paris (I'm not very good at choosing titles:-).
Ludo, Graham, good luck.