I have to disagree with the premise that Dokuwiki is getting left behind over a Wysiwyg editor, something up until recently Mediawiki never had, they made trivial attempts to implement the various editors such as CKGeditor and FCKGedit and various others that crashed and burned. Dokuwiki from what I have seen has been on a leading edge of implementing WYSIWYG more so then MW has.
Now that MW has their Visual Editor sure it looks nice, but, and it's a big but, it mainly works on the Wiki Foundation sites only, it has a very difficult time playing nice with websites on shared hosting, or even websites on their own server, it's hard to implement. The feedback about implementing it on personal sites built with MW has been hopeful at best.
Some folks have had luck installing Visual Editor on a site that is hosted on a shared server by creating a Parsoid running a node.js on an external app site such as Heroku, and it's no easy task, the instructions at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor_on_a_shared_host seem basic enough, but once you get into the actual steps to create a running instance of node.js it's a hack fest, one that is not for the faint at heart. I know, I have tried it and failed miserably all dozen or so times I attempted it on my own MW installation on shared hosting.
Shared hosting environments don't like node.js, it's a constant running resource that they don't allow unless you opt into their more pricey VPS servers, and again, if your a hacker, sure you may enjoy getting the node.js and parsoid to play nice, but who wants to hack when they'd rather be building a wonderful database of information with software that is already there, with a Wysiwyg.
Dokuwiki has had WYSIWYG that works for sometime now, I personally love ckgedit, it has a nice modern look to it, and it works, you can also use the reference/footnote feature in ckgedit that is really cool. In other words, the premise that Dokuwiki is getting left behind because of a missing or glitchy WYSIWYG, I feel is incorrect, I'd like to argue that DW was way ahead of MW on this one.
Just my modest opinion here, I am a user, not a developer or coder, I couldn't hack my way out of a wet paper sack to save my life, so using something that works off the shelf, is very important to me, and DW has done just that so far.
Oh ya, by the way, once you get that Visual Editor to play nice on shared hosting, you'll see that there is a significant delay in the editor appearing, as it has to run through the node.js first then back to your site. Also, once you get a significant amount of users on your MW installation using the Visual Editor, you now have to pay a service such as Heroku to run your node.js instance. Their service is free up to a point.