> leave that part up to the Knowledge Base owner. Well, that's against the philosophy of a wiki. Also, in a small team, nobody is the "knowledgebase owner" - h

> leave that part up to the Knowledge Base owner. Well, that's against the philosophy of a wiki. Also, in a small team, nobody is the "knowledgebase owner" - he's just another developer. Putting a human in the workflow creates friction. But I'm totally with you on the "naming things" problem. A full-blown corporate knowledge management system is a repository you can throw anything into - invoices, emails, memos, reports, etc.; the system will automatically generate a knowledge taxonomy and article summaries. But such systems require much more maintenance effort than something simple like a wiki, and are overkill for a small team of developers.