A knowledge base is judged on one thing only: the share of pages someone reopened this year.
Documentation spaces fill up easily and empty slowly. The problem is almost never the editor: it is the distance between the page and the work it describes. An intervention procedure written in a separate space gets consulted for two months, then bypassed, then goes stale with nobody flagging it. When the same procedure sits beside the intervention form and the client record, it is reread at the moment it serves, and corrected by whoever spots the gap. So the question is less about the tool than about the path that leads to the page.
The questions to ask any tool, ours included. The answer given here is Thingsform's.
In the same space as the forms, records and tasks. The procedure is consulted from the intervention it applies to, which settles the most ordinary difficulty of all documentation: nobody thinks to go and find it elsewhere.
Full versioning keeps the modification history, page by page. On a quality procedure or a safety instruction, the question “how long has that sentence been there” comes up sooner or later, and it is better for it to have an answer.
Through two distinct modules: Notes for personal writing and write-ups, Wiki for shared, versioned knowledge. That separation avoids the mixing that weighs down every documentation space, where the essentials drown in meeting notes.
On servers located in the European Union, with daily backups. An internal knowledge base often holds more sensitive information than people expect: client names, negotiated rates, safety procedures, subcontractor contacts.
The Wiki module is included from the Business plan, making it one of the highest modules in the range. Notes, from the Essential plan, already cover shared writing in folders: for many teams they are enough, and we would rather say so.
Often, no. Here are both cases, in the honest order.
For the versioned Wiki, yes. For shared writing in folders, Notes are enough from the Essential plan and cover many teams' needs. Versioning becomes necessary when a page commits you: a safety instruction, an audited procedure.
Content pastes across keeping its formatting. The advice that matters is elsewhere: bring across only pages opened at least once this year. A full migration mostly carries over the dead weight that was already discouraging use.
Look at how many pages were edited by someone other than their author in the last six months. If the answer is near zero, changing tools will fix nothing: it is the access path that must move closer to the work, not the editor that must be replaced.
We describe neither the features nor the pricing of another vendor, which change without notice to us. This page sets out the criteria to examine and Thingsform's answers. For the other tool, its current terms are authoritative.
Confluence is a trademark of its publisher, cited here for reference. This page does not describe its features or pricing, which change over time: refer to its current terms.
The right way to decide
Rebuild your hardest form on the free plan, and have it filled in the field. Half a day is enough, and the answer stops being a matter of opinion.