Moka seems interesting. But because I don’t know about it, I’ll rather describe how we use the tools over here, so you can find if you can do something similar with Moka.
In my case, I try a project/problem/context based learning. So we introduce tools to enhance, via hypertext, a reading/writing ecosystem that has been pretty limited so far by word processors and social media. From that premise we use different tools according to the context: HedgeDoc for quick workshop/class notes during the sessions, Hypothesis for collective annotated reading, TiddlyWiki (using TiddlyHost) to (re)organize and to (re)structure the information and each learner develops his/her own public repository, using Fossil and metatools like Grafoscopio and TiddlyWikiPharo bridge all this workflow together, as we learn how to extend such metatools to deal with friction points in the workflow.
This year we’re going to introduce mdBook, as it’s focused on documentation workflows that are pretty similar to what we do, while providing the static site counterpart of our dynamic workflows and without requiring conversions from one Markdown variant to WikiText. And later I would like to experiment with HastyScribe, as its syntax and semantics are closer to the complete hypertext pragmatics that we experience with TW, including transclusion and macros (that are kind of “parametrized transclusion”, with repeating and changing parts).
At some point, I would like to have a more integrated workflow and (meta)tools, with less format/data translation between them and bridging better dynamic/static, individual/collective, content/functionality, online/offline. It is on that context, where I would introduce a new tool, that may bridge/replace some of them in our toolkit (in that context I see Moka more like redundancy that a replacement). I will elaborate more about it in this very thread.
Cheers,