lynx

Great, that means it's unencumbered and we can use it for gemrb too.

Nice job! The style resembles iwd2 more than iwd1, but it doesn't matter. Did you create all the models and textures yourself too?

yeah, it only increases the maximum hitpoints (by design).

I had the same issue, but I forgot if I had to hack around it or if she's just outside, being all cool.

This doesn't have much to do with the wiki, except that it would be easier to do there, since some namespaces (directories) could be open to public (some kind of a staging area, a howto part or both). The main goal of the wikification isn't to change the format (why bother?) or add loads of new data inplace, but it is good to see that people want more documentation somewhere.

I think both points would mostly be covered by not opening it up completely. By choosing a team of expert comaintainers, you'd have less work, more time and take less flak. I'll try to think it through sometime this summer and will post here when I have something to show. The forum input rss integration will probably be the hardest part.

That's the plan, but I wanted to see what igi and other community members think about it first. I wouldn't want to start or maintain a fork. Having the data in a wiki would not change the path to discovery, nor would it limit discussion (especially with some kind of a feed to the forum). If it will be succesful, it would hopefully reside in the same place as the current IESDP, so I see no random-dumb-webpage problem. (if you were refering to what gemrb's address resolves to: this is just the end host, since sourceforge had crappy project web space until this year; the site is accessible through the simple gemrb.sf.net/gemrb.sourceforge.net subdomain)

I can take care of a) sometime (I run several wikis including the gemrb one). There are also some html "decompilers" available. b) is not an issue since the tables are simple. c) wikis have come a long way and in many you can export to various formats. Those of course include html, which I guess you also use for the downloadable version. d) I haven't been here as long as you, but it is clear that at minimum 3 people here would be worthy. If you meant to question whether they would do anything about it: it can't get any worse than now. There have been plenty of verified findings, but the last IESDP update was done in May 08. e) The forum would not be deprecated. It could probably import the rss feed of changes, so double posting wouldn't be required. It would still be used by people asking questions or by people without write access to point out new info (no choice there).

Did anyone ever consider moving IESDP to a wiki? That way not only updates could happen soon after things are found, but it would also allow for more people to have editing access (could still be restricted) and any changes would be easy to review and follow.