When comparing HyperText Markup Language (HTML) vs MediaWiki, the Slant community recommends HyperText Markup Language (HTML) for most people. In the question“What are the best markup languages?” HyperText Markup Language (HTML) is ranked 3rd while MediaWiki is ranked 8th. The most important reason people chose HyperText Markup Language (HTML) is:
Styling through CSS is declarative and powerful, but somewhat inadequate for print without expensive tools like Prince.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Styling via CSS
Styling through CSS is declarative and powerful, but somewhat inadequate for print without expensive tools like Prince.
Pro Natively understood by browsers
Natively understood by browsers, you can author and view HTML on virtually every computer without any additional software.
Pro Most universal and widely used markup language
Pro Simple
HTML is fairly simple for both humans and machines. It can be repetitive and burdensome to type, but less so than most other XML or SGML-derived formats.
Pro Simple interactivity through JavaScript
JavaScript code can be embedded directly into a HTML document.
Pro The de facto standard
Mediawiki is a widely used wiki engine. It is used to power Wikipedia and thus most people will be more comfortable/accustomed to using MediaWiki.
Pro It has a powerful templating system
Pro Free and open source
Licensed under GPL.
Pro Version control
MediaWiki allows viewing past revisions of pages.
Pro It has a usable WYSIWYG editor
Pro Thanks to Wikipedia it is thoroughly documented
Pro Runs on any PHP server
It requires a webserver running PHP 5.2 or later of any kind.
Pro Great multilingual support
MediaWiki has full support for over 65 languages and partial support for over 300.
Pro Multiple database support
MediaWiki can store data in MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle and SQLite databases.
Cons
Con Verbose
Tags can hide actual content.
Con Access control requires an extension
There is no built-in access control, but you can download an extension for ACL.
