Purely out of curiousity, I've glanced at Markdown and Creole, neither of which I've used.
The problem with Markdown is that the format as defined simply isn't a Wiki format. It's Wiki-like, but doesn't include the markup for links to wiki pages. (There's some kind of linking, but it isn't wiki- linking.) So if Markdown is used it will be necessary to extend it. There appear to be three C implementations of Markdown; one, which I didn't look at, is only a partial implementation. One, peg-markdown, is apparently profligate of memory use, but is intended to be easily extensible. Another, discount, has an API that (to my casual view) doesn't appear to be tailored for use in a Wiki; changes would be required. How easy it would be to extend, I dunno. Creole, on the other hand, *is* a Wiki syntax, though it's an odd one (**bold**? //italics//? where did *those* come from?) (Yes, I know that the Creole site has the rationale for everything.) However, the list of extant parsers on the Creole web page doesn't include one written in C. At a casual glance, then, neither Markdown nor Creole looks like an easy drop-in replacement for what we have now. (Feel free to prove me wrong; ten minutes of web-browsing doesn't make me any kind of expert.) Will On Nov 29, 2009, at 4:55 PM, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote: > Just to be clear here since there has been some distracting > arguments made: There is no bikeshedding being done in this thread. > As proof of point a clear major majority do not care what color the > bikeshed is (AKA, what format to use) according to my poll. > > I see two (major) sides of this conversation: > > 1. People who want better formatting, whatever the result. > 2. People who are worried that everyone else is worried about the > color of the bikeshed. > > The only minority are those who are happy with HTML. Since any > markdown language allows HTML they really don't factor into this > topic. > > tl;dr quit concern trolling > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene > <thinkwritem...@gmail.com > > wrote: > Q1: 4 YES | 1 APATHETIC | 2 NO > Q2: 4 WHATEVER WORKS | 2 HTML | 1 MARKDOWN > > PS I said this was specifically for my own curiosity, nothing more. > Nice try, Zed. > > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Zed A. Shaw <zeds...@zedshaw.com> > wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 05:05:52PM -0600, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene > wrote: > > > Also, Zed challenged me to prove that more people want any kind of > (better) > > formatting than not: > > > > http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dDBVZS1CM0M0akFiSlRtUE5CdUdKa2c6MA > > > > There's the form link. I am in no way in control of this or any > part of > > Fossil. I simply want to see for personal curiosity. > > Yay! Evidence! Hooray! Finally, people can now just vote and then > when > they're done voting you can dive in and implement it! > > (I voted BTW.) > > -- > Zed A. Shaw > http://zedshaw.com/ > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ------------------------------------------------------------------ will -at- wjduquette.com | Catch our weblog, http://foothills.wjduquette.com/blog | The View from the Foothills _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
