Hello Hannes,
> I however don't think we can do that with XML. > And I want to make it even easier to contribute - with essentially no > learning curve. > > Looking around the web.. People seem pretty happy with Markdown... > Now, markdown has its obvious crazy huge drawbacks when it comes to > writing documentations.. but I think it can be done. Well.. Sortof. > > We would need to create our own Markdown flavour, only adding a tick > here and there, should give us very readable format where people focus > on content rather then struggling with picking xml elements or fitting > things into correct containers or limited semantics. At work we chose reStructuredText[1], because it gives you way more elements than markdown and is only slighter harder to write. Plain markdown e.g. has no tables, and definition lists, while rST has it out of the box. The TYPO3 project also started to use rST for all their documentation[2] a while a go and is in the process of transferring their existing OpenDocument documentation into rST. Before focussing on Markdown exclusively, please consider rST. [1] http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html [2] http://typo3.org/news/article/giving-documentation-a-rest/ -- Regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen Christian Weiske -=≡ Geeking around in the name of science since 1982 ≡=-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
