subject:"\[tw\] Re\: Issue\: I'd like to talk about Markup\-\-\-broadly"

Ciao Mark S.

Provided the editor, or the edit section for tables, is mono-spaced I think 
its a better visual solution. Issues might be if you have a very wide table 
("table-mode" a popout to address?).

J.

Mark S. wrote:
>
> This may be a digression on tables and ascii.
>
> The problem with drawing ascii tables is there's inevitably a cell which 
> has contents that are too long and that when rendered will fold to a second 
> line. Also drawing pipes "|" is a pain.  But a markup could have a table 
> mode where 
> white space (double spaces, double line entry) are used for delimiters.
>
> Then you could have:
>
> .table
> I am the eggWe all liveImagine all 
> drop manwith a yellow  the tribbles
> baboon
>
> Yesterday, tic  Hey Dude,  Feed the
> tac toe was don't make squirrels
> a mess
> .endtable
>
> where it was easy to keep things aligned and still readable as ASCII.
>
> -- Mark
>
>
> On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 9:39:04 AM UTC-7, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>>
>> Ha! Really interesting issue. Which I'm gonna riff off. 
>>
>> PMario..
>>
>>> I don't want to mess with some ASCII art to get a table going. 
>>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/dcc963b6-5b20-4550-b1e0-746785af2aec%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-15 Thread 'Mark S.' via TiddlyWiki

This may be a digression on tables and ascii.

The problem with drawing ascii tables is there's inevitably a cell which 
has contents that are too long and that when rendered will fold to a second 
line. Also drawing pipes "|" is a pain.  But a markup could have a table 
mode where 
white space (double spaces, double line entry) are used for delimiters.

Then you could have:

.table
I am the eggWe all liveImagine all 
drop manwith a yellow  the tribbles
baboon

Yesterday, tic  Hey Dude,  Feed the
tac toe was don't make squirrels
a mess
.endtable

where it was easy to keep things aligned and still readable as ASCII.

-- Mark

On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 9:39:04 AM UTC-7, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> Ha! Really interesting issue. Which I'm gonna riff off. 
>
> PMario..
>
>> I don't want to mess with some ASCII art to get a table going. 
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/d5c20454-75ef-4604-8f08-28170d7eb21d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

Ha! Really interesting issue. Which I'm gonna riff off.

PMario..

> I don't want to mess with some ASCII art to get a table going.
>

I guess the *ASCII art* of tables emerged wit markups to VISUALLY present
edit text to be readable before render. A central Gruber point on markup.

Your version is *proto-code*, NOT simple "visual markup". Its instructions,
then content. It is NOT the thing Core Markup Ideas are into.

And therein is EXACTLY the limits I'm trying to talk about...

...That additive markup is often a BLUNT instrument. It is a very dumb
(though useful) derivative replication of HTML/CSS code in shorthand. And
nothing more. The conceit its "visually like writing" breaks down quickly.
I think WikiText tables are as about as far as you can go. And the mess on
compatibility on them between markup systems testifies to the limits.

And so Markup struggles with HTML once you get beyond simple blocks or
spans. ALL the conversion issues seem to stem from that.

When Markup starts to get clever, like you see in Fountain Markup, markup
largely disappears from view. Which is exactly what is needed.

*The hidden message of "markup" is ... you don't need any user markup at
all IF the document has a readable pattern ... so, rather, parse the Layout
Type. Give the editor even less to type.*

As soon as you switch from thinking in terms of "Generic Markup" to "Layout
Type" the issues change.

Your example is very interesting for illustrating the contradiction of
"less visual markup and more instructions can be better." But its hardly
"WikiText" as we know it.

I think its good to argue this through more.

Best wishes
Josiah

table-title: test
table-caption: bla bla
table-rows: 3
table-columns: 3
h1: header 1
h2: header 2
h3: header 3

a1:
As much text, as I want to write here

a2:
more text
with a hard line break

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/a944fe0d-faa5-4728-950e-1ef017af8d74%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-15 Thread PMario

On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 3:33:56 PM UTC+1, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> On CommonMark ...
>
> PMario:
>
>> If you have a closer look, there is no "table" definition. .. It's 
>> missing. 
>>
>> AND they don't have an idea about transclusions, widgets, and other stuff 
>> that is essential for tiddlywiki. ... But as far as I can see it, at the 
>> moment they don't use syntax like <<>>, {{}}, {{{}}} or <$abc>
>
>
> Frankly, I can't see how dynamically rendered "programmatic syntax" (i.e. 
> markup that invokes functions specific to an implementation) could become 
> any standard. As far as I understand it all the simple "markups" use 
> HMTL/CSS substitution and it is THAT which allows inter-variant conversion. 
> But for anything else: WHAT are they substituting?
>

That's not really the point I wanted to make. They could use those markers 
for different things in the standard, because they don't know the dynamic 
stuff. ... So the markers are basically blocked for variants. ... but if a 
variant defines those markers, they are "kind of blocked" for the default 
spec. ... 

So who ever is first will win ... 

-

>The lack of Table support in CommonMark is ridiculous for something that 
claims to be a mediating standard.

Table markup is difficult and imo non of the existing mechanisms are very 
satisfying. ... 

For me as a writer I don't want to mess with some ASCII art to get a table 
going. 
eg:

+-+-+
| text | more text |
+-+-+

is CRAP --- I don't want to mess around fixing frames, after I did change 
the content. I would prefer a descriptive like 
eg:

table-title: test
table-caption: bla bla 
table-rows: 3
table-columns: 3
h1: header 1
h2: header 2
h3: header 3

a1: 
As much text, as I want to write here

a2: 
more text
with a hard line break

b2:
column 2 row 2
b1 is empty

c1..c3:
Text that spans 3 columns

... and so on. So I can define content, without needing to mess with the 
formatting. 

This is just an idea, nothing concrete and misses all the edge cases, we 
can do today with the existing syntax. 

May be the new grid-css may give us better possibilities already. ... 

-m

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c4efc03c-9333-48e1-94db-97b6fc42481d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

On CommonMark ...

PMario:

> If you have a closer look, there is no "table" definition. .. It's 
> missing. 
>
> AND they don't have an idea about transclusions, widgets, and other stuff 
> that is essential for tiddlywiki. ... But as far as I can see it, at the 
> moment they don't use syntax like <<>>, {{}}, {{{}}} or <$abc>


Frankly, I can't see how dynamically rendered "programmatic syntax" (i.e. 
markup that invokes functions specific to an implementation) could become 
any standard. As far as I understand it all the simple "markups" use 
HMTL/CSS substitution and it is THAT which allows inter-variant conversion. 
But for anything else: WHAT are they substituting?

Maybe a basic syntax for Transclusion could be? since the concept behind it 
is generalisable, but the issue would be WHAT is transcluded in specific 
instances that in the current systems are application specific in their 
realisation. If HTML more clearly embraced transclusion then maybe a 
"markup" could too? This is a quick way of pointing out that "convertible 
markup" is convertible BECAUSE its DERIVATIVE. Once its not derivative you 
no longer have any shared conversion reference point.

The lack of Table support in CommonMark is ridiculous for something that 
claims to be a mediating standard.

Best wishes
Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/74ddda7a-f42c-4fef-9311-06bbd2f71e08%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

Ciao PMario

More than one reply to your great, long "Briefing" :-)

I love this kind of overview. Its extremely helpful. Even if someone 
disagree on points, it helps make clear what the "territory" is. 

This is very important to decent decisions as its *explicit*. 

Once its explicit its a lot easier for newcomers to grasp what the issues 
are that longer term users know *implicitly*.

"Dev" steps are never about code alone. They are as much about 
understanding issues in the context of previous history.

This is one area where we are currently weak, I think. Often *the broader 
contextual framework* for understanding the WHY of what we do? is missing.

I don't see many "*Position Papers*" on TW. Github I don't think is the 
right place for them. And here on GG certainly isn't. But BROAD 
contextualisation of major dev trends I do think need them. Also they are 
readable by people who are not programmers, but who can equally have grasp 
of the underlying issues and contribute.

I'll write about substantive issues I have on some points in your Briefing 
separately.

Finally: *I hope you are archiving that post*. It is VERY useful.

Best wishes
Josiah

PMario wrote a fab briefing on Markdown & TiddlyWiki...
>
>
> Markdown was first published in 
> March 2004. 
> TiddlyWiki was first published 
> in Sept. 2004
>
> In 2007 there has been an attempt to standardize wiki syntax, with the 
> wiki-creole 
> spec . At this time 
> TiddlyWiki sytax did influence the creole specification. ... 
> But the spec didn't take off. IMO because it didn't bring something new. I 
> was "yet an other wiki syntax". 
>
> Tiddlywiki had a "high" in 2007, and MD stagnated till 2009. See google 
> trends 
> .
>  
>
>
> As Joe pointed out: >>"Markdown solves the problem "make the input easy"<<
> I did write somewhere else. ... MD is "simple and good enough" to be 
> useful ... and it doesn't interfere with the text source code. So the 
> source is still human readable, without the need to render it. 
>
> MD took off, as github and others "re-discoved" it to create static html 
> site-generators in 2010. Github used it first "to prettify" README files 
> ... 
>
> Trends to compare TW with MD: from 2004 till now 
> .
> TW-MD-github: from 2004 till now 
> .
>   
> ... Here we add github to the mix, which is a much, much more popular 
> search term, which "dominates" the others.
>
> But IMO we can see a clear relation between github and MD or to be more 
> exact github flavored markdown (gfm). 
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 13, 2018 at 9:33:44 PM UTC+1, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>>
>> How important, in your opinion, PMario, are RFC's to TiddlyWiki's uptake?
>>
>
> As written above, I don't think specs are the key to success. ... But 
> success makes specs necessary!
>
> The mime-type text/x-markdown has grown to the "de-facto standard" for 
> static sites since 2010 ... 
>  
>
>> I can't honestly say for myself that an RFC motivated me to do anything. 
>> At the same time I do understand they have a role. BUT is it *before* the 
>> fact or *after*?
>>
>
> See the history. 
>  
>
>> In other words, for TW, WHAT exactly should we be promoting to it? 
>>
>
> The initial markdown spec from 2004 had some flaws, which 
> http://commonmark.org/ wanted to fix. ... BUT there are still some 
> problems with the spec . 
>
> If you have a closer look, there is no "table" definition. .. It's 
> missing. 
>
> AND they don't have an idea about transclusions, widgets, and other stuff 
> that is essential for tiddlywiki. ... But as far as I can see it, at the 
> moment they don't use syntax like <<>>, {{}}, {{{}}} or <$abc> 
>
> So it will be open for "variants"
>  
>
>> And WHY?
>>
>
> To drive adoption. 
>
> have fun!
> mario
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/826bd6b7-b070-4258-9376-dec4751daf97%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-14 Thread PMario

edit: 

MD took off, as github and others "re-discoved" it to create static html 
> sites in 2010. Github used it first "to prettify" README files ...
>

to
MD took off, as github and others "re-discoved" it to create static html 
site-generators in 2010. Github used it first "to prettify" README files 
... 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/6a7a28e3-f3f3-4c83-b269-5de40c810083%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-14 Thread PMario

Hi, 

A little bit of history, *from my point of view*. ... 

Markdown was first published in 
March 2004. 
TiddlyWiki was first published in 
Sept. 2004

In 2007 there has been an attempt to standardize wiki syntax, with the 
wiki-creole 
spec . At this time 
TiddlyWiki sytax did influence the creole specification. ... 
But the spec didn't take off. IMO because it didn't bring something new. I 
was "yet an other wiki syntax". 

Tiddlywiki had a "high" in 2007, and MD stagnated till 2009. See google 
trends 
.

As Joe pointed out: >>"Markdown solves the problem "make the input easy"<<
I did write somewhere else. ... MD is "simple and good enough" to be useful 
... and it doesn't interfere with the text source code. So the source is 
still human readable, without the need to render it. 

MD took off, as github and others "re-discoved" it to create static html 
sites in 2010. Github used it first "to prettify" README files ... 

Trends to compare TW with MD: from 2004 till now 
.
TW-MD-github: from 2004 till now 
.

... Here we add github to the mix, which is a much, much more popular 
search term, which "dominates" the others.

But IMO we can see a clear relation between github and MD or to be more 
exact github flavored markdown (gfm). 

On Tuesday, March 13, 2018 at 9:33:44 PM UTC+1, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> How important, in your opinion, PMario, are RFC's to TiddlyWiki's uptake?
>

As written above, I don't think specs are the key to success. ... But 
success makes specs necessary!

The mime-type text/x-markdown has grown to the "de-facto standard" for 
static sites since 2010 ... 

> I can't honestly say for myself that an RFC motivated me to do anything. 
> At the same time I do understand they have a role. BUT is it *before* the 
> fact or *after*?
>

See the history. 

> In other words, for TW, WHAT exactly should we be promoting to it? 
>

The initial markdown spec from 2004 had some flaws, which 
http://commonmark.org/ wanted to fix. ... BUT there are still some problems 
with the spec . 

If you have a closer look, there is no "table" definition. .. It's missing. 

AND they don't have an idea about transclusions, widgets, and other stuff 
that is essential for tiddlywiki. ... But as far as I can see it, at the 
moment they don't use syntax like <<>>, {{}}, {{{}}} or <$abc> 

So it will be open for "variants"

> And WHY?
>

To drive adoption. 

have fun!
mario

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/3ee6aaa4-5d64-4548-9142-a285e3244387%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-13 Thread TonyM

Joe,

I had a similar waking idea a few weeks/months ago, make HTML the common 
language, but community members pointed out there is a potential loss of 
information HTML > TW given the degree of sophistication that can be added 
to HTML, also just think how more is moving into CSS now. Personally this 
would be fine to me, if the conversion process simplified the source HTML.

I agree with your suggestion

Tony

On Wednesday, March 14, 2018 at 6:15:11 AM UTC+11, Joe Armstrong wrote:
>
> I woke up with the following thought:
>
> I'm not so worried about the difference in markdown / wiki syntaxes
>
> I think this is like language - there are many dialects of English
> American, English, Australian and so on - they differ but we understand 
> each other.
>
> Then there is Swedish, Norwegian, Danish again different but in many ways 
> similar.
>
> What I wondered was about code to convert random HTML to TW code
> and NOT the other way around.
>
> I know how to convert TW to HTML - this is what the system does all the 
> time.
>
> It would be very nice to take any fragment of HTML and turn it into TW 
> tiddlers
>
> This would involve partitioning (splitting big pages into smaller tiddlers)
> removing styling and guessing the structure
>
> Has anybody thought about this
>
> Cheer
>
> /Joe
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:04 AM, @TiddlyTweeter  > wrote:
>
>> This is an interesting issue. On the one hand we have markup for wikitext 
>> styling using, for instance, the @@ syntax. On the other hand one 
>> inevitably hits a contradiction in Markup systems that are meant to be 
>> human readable. That to get complex styling is not sane through "Markup", 
>> as Jermolene put it well recently: *that would take us back to the same 
>> level of complexity as HTML itself. *
>>
>> This is precisely why I'm as much interested in styling for specific 
>> Document Types as in generic markup. Markup is a blunt instrument for 
>> specifics IMO. Document types provide a layout that is ITSELF the 
>> TEMPLATE for format. This allows sophisticated styling without any 
>> explicit markup at all.
>>
>> I slightly exaggerate. But not much.
>>
>> Joe Armstrong wrote:
>>>
>>> The problem(s) I want to solve are "make the output beautiful" 
>>> and "make the output programmatically" when this makes sence
>>>
>>> TW seems a pretty good compromise at these - For beautiful output
>>> I'd have to turn TW in LaTeX of something - but I'll cross one
>>> bridge at a time.
>>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the 
>> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/NKOnq3hKryo/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f14591a6-f08d-482e-a80e-f10953d57171%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/d0b784c9-b593-4f2a-aaa9-d8f2c26b954a%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

How important, in your opinion, PMario, are RFC's to TiddlyWiki's uptake?

I can't honestly say for myself that an RFC motivated me to do anything. At 
the same time I do understand they have a role. BUT is it *before* the fact 
or *after*?

In other words, for TW, WHAT exactly should we be promoting to it? And WHY?

Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/94271bac-738c-471f-ba7d-bf73abeaa594%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

Ciao PMario

I really appreciate your concern over standards.

I have an observation. At 7764:3.4 
 they include Fountain.io 
syntax  as a Markdown variant. 

That is odd in a spec given that Fountain is, when it is working well, a 
non-visible markup. Its a brilliant minimalist FORMATTING system that uses 
Markup ONLY to FORCE compliance, otherwise you never see it. 

In other words that "standard" is a handbag of approaches so diverse its 
melange of discontinuity. 

I can't see the merit when its accepting a non-visible markup system.

Josiah


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/65f00030-55bd-496e-afe2-83aa9a1c93fd%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

Yes. Jeremy made a careful Text-Slicer edition 
.

Personally I'd be in for reducing on one sweep all HTML. 

There is something very satisfying in reducing carefully wrought HTML to 
ground zero markup.

Josiah

On Tuesday, 13 March 2018 20:15:11 UTC+1, Joe Armstrong wrote:
>
> I woke up with the following thought:
>
> I'm not so worried about the difference in markdown / wiki syntaxes
>
> I think this is like language - there are many dialects of English
> American, English, Australian and so on - they differ but we understand 
> each other.
>
> Then there is Swedish, Norwegian, Danish again different but in many ways 
> similar.
>
> What I wondered was about code to convert random HTML to TW code
> and NOT the other way around.
>
> I know how to convert TW to HTML - this is what the system does all the 
> time.
>
> It would be very nice to take any fragment of HTML and turn it into TW 
> tiddlers
>
> This would involve partitioning (splitting big pages into smaller tiddlers)
> removing styling and guessing the structure
>
> Has anybody thought about this
>
> Cheer
>
> /Joe
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:04 AM, @TiddlyTweeter  > wrote:
>
>> This is an interesting issue. On the one hand we have markup for wikitext 
>> styling using, for instance, the @@ syntax. On the other hand one 
>> inevitably hits a contradiction in Markup systems that are meant to be 
>> human readable. That to get complex styling is not sane through "Markup", 
>> as Jermolene put it well recently: *that would take us back to the same 
>> level of complexity as HTML itself. *
>>
>> This is precisely why I'm as much interested in styling for specific 
>> Document Types as in generic markup. Markup is a blunt instrument for 
>> specifics IMO. Document types provide a layout that is ITSELF the 
>> TEMPLATE for format. This allows sophisticated styling without any 
>> explicit markup at all.
>>
>> I slightly exaggerate. But not much.
>>
>> Joe Armstrong wrote:
>>>
>>> The problem(s) I want to solve are "make the output beautiful" 
>>> and "make the output programmatically" when this makes sence
>>>
>>> TW seems a pretty good compromise at these - For beautiful output
>>> I'd have to turn TW in LaTeX of something - but I'll cross one
>>> bridge at a time.
>>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the 
>> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/NKOnq3hKryo/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f14591a6-f08d-482e-a80e-f10953d57171%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/7cb1b9b5-5520-4b16-b4c6-6e644d47d3a1%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-13 Thread Joe Armstrong

I woke up with the following thought:

I'm not so worried about the difference in markdown / wiki syntaxes

I think this is like language - there are many dialects of English
American, English, Australian and so on - they differ but we understand
each other.

Then there is Swedish, Norwegian, Danish again different but in many ways
similar.

What I wondered was about code to convert random HTML to TW code
and NOT the other way around.

I know how to convert TW to HTML - this is what the system does all the
time.

It would be very nice to take any fragment of HTML and turn it into TW
tiddlers

This would involve partitioning (splitting big pages into smaller tiddlers)
removing styling and guessing the structure

Has anybody thought about this

Cheer

/Joe

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:04 AM, @TiddlyTweeter 
wrote:

> This is an interesting issue. On the one hand we have markup for wikitext
> styling using, for instance, the @@ syntax. On the other hand one
> inevitably hits a contradiction in Markup systems that are meant to be
> human readable. That to get complex styling is not sane through "Markup",
> as Jermolene put it well recently: *that would take us back to the same
> level of complexity as HTML itself. *
>
> This is precisely why I'm as much interested in styling for specific
> Document Types as in generic markup. Markup is a blunt instrument for
> specifics IMO. Document types provide a layout that is ITSELF the
> TEMPLATE for format. This allows sophisticated styling without any
> explicit markup at all.
>
> I slightly exaggerate. But not much.
>
> Joe Armstrong wrote:
>>
>> The problem(s) I want to solve are "make the output beautiful"
>> and "make the output programmatically" when this makes sence
>>
>> TW seems a pretty good compromise at these - For beautiful output
>> I'd have to turn TW in LaTeX of something - but I'll cross one
>> bridge at a time.
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> topic/tiddlywiki/NKOnq3hKryo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tiddlywiki/f14591a6-f08d-482e-a80e-f10953d57171%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CAL6cY6F%3DkVZbX_8XSBGpWcsQ4sOyi76DKvfKf01cF98d%2BhR_DA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

This is an interesting issue. On the one hand we have markup for wikitext 
styling using, for instance, the @@ syntax. On the other hand one 
inevitably hits a contradiction in Markup systems that are meant to be 
human readable. That to get complex styling is not sane through "Markup", 
as Jermolene put it well recently: *that would take us back to the same 
level of complexity as HTML itself. *

This is precisely why I'm as much interested in styling for specific 
Document Types as in generic markup. Markup is a blunt instrument for 
specifics IMO. Document types provide a layout that is ITSELF the TEMPLATE 
for format. This allows sophisticated styling without any explicit markup 
at all.

I slightly exaggerate. But not much.

Joe Armstrong wrote:
>
> The problem(s) I want to solve are "make the output beautiful" 
> and "make the output programmatically" when this makes sence
>
> TW seems a pretty good compromise at these - For beautiful output
> I'd have to turn TW in LaTeX of something - but I'll cross one
> bridge at a time.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f14591a6-f08d-482e-a80e-f10953d57171%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

I'm kinda of the opinion that for some types of document structures that we 
can in TW "make input even easier than Markdown"

Joe Armstrong wrote:
>
> Markdown solves the problem "make the input easy"
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/da09f861-05dd-4d6c-aa09-a48ba0a5eafe%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

I just want to add the footnote that its easy in TW to COMBINE a "personal 
markup system" with the standard markup it has. If you composite your own 
markup BEFORE the main parser runs then you can have the best of both as 
first it would deal with your markup and then standard TW markup. The 
downside is you'd need a "Content Type" that likely only your wiki would 
have. In many cases this would not matter. 

TonyM wrote:
>
> But I would like to add this nuance,  I do often want ways to ensure I 
> have a consistent look and feel in a given solution.
>
> Perhaps this is where people get confused, because they see having YAML 
> yet another markup language as providing a consistent look and feel when 
> all that is needed is some of our own personal standards.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f51c6314-7f84-4a71-9619-e6388e82e049%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

Right

Recently Mark S. worked with Lua (inside Pandoc) to create a "proof of 
concept" converter WikiPedia -> TiddlyWiki. 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/0Z4F7fBOBgQ/ebTapW6zBgAJ

Lua is interesting as both a convertor and a sophisticated support for 
complex formatting.

Ste Wilson wrote:
>
> Here we are.. Luatex
>
> https://www.overleaf.com/blog/571-an-introduction-to-luatex-part-1-what-is-it-and-what-makes-it-so-different

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/d18e0524-b232-400c-8ee1-4feeefd14cce%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

This discussion is really interesting!

One thing is more clear to me, from the excellent, relevant, replies, is 
how discussion of "Markup" quickly invokes multiple issues: amongst others, 
conversion, compliance standards, nice styling & working-practices. 

I'm thinking about how to restate some of the issues I was trying to make 
originally a bit more clearly so I can answer some of the points raised in 
a way that is helpful. The fact its quite difficult to articulate them is, 
I think, part of the issue too. "Markup" ideas, I think, can be a 
conceptual trap that is limiting.

ONE thing that I don't see explicitly in the replies, apart from PMario's, 
a grasp of the fundamental open (unique?) structure of TW parsing. FWIW, I 
wouldn't have written those posts without that looming in my mind. 

Best wishes
Josiah  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/06b5e9e5-8e24-4595-8f21-33c7228b4c15%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-13 Thread PMario

On Monday, March 12, 2018 at 5:16:00 PM UTC+1, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> from another thread, relevant here ...
>
> Jeremy Ruston wrote:
>>
>> ... In retrospect I was far too influenced by Markdown back in 2011/12 
>> when TW5 wikitext was first being defined.
>>
>
> Side note I want to make on just this point about Markdown. I remember 
> when Markdown emerged (as an end-user / avid blogger) thinking "this is a 
> godsend". But also, "this is likely to become a somewhat messy non-standard 
> standard long-term" -- because its "just too easy." If you get what I mean? 
>

It actually is a standard type (since 2016) text/markdown (RFC 7763 
), and this makes it even stronger. 
The good thing, that markdown already had a lot of different dialects, as 
the standard was developed, they where also registered as markdown-variants 
(RFC 7764), which can be specified in the mime type. The variant servers as 
a hint for parser, what to do. .. If it doesn't know something, it just 
renders it as plain/text.

See: RFC 7764  - Guidance on Markdown: 
Design Philosophies, Stability Strategies, and Select Registrations

RFC 7764 also formalizes the registration process 
 for MD-variants. ... So TW 
syntax, that is out of range in MD atm could be made a variant, imo without 
loosing functionality.

the mime type with a variant  
looks like this: 

 Content-Type: text/markdown; charset=UTF-8; variant=Original

As you pointed out, there is a lot missing in "original" markdown, but now 
there is a formalized mechanism to register all kind of new very specific 
syntax additions. ... 
AND TW is _not_ one of them. So in the long run we will loose, if we don't do 
it right. 

As you pointed out. TW has the potential, to convert one syntax to an other 
(with some limitations). ... BUT ... not with the internal AST, that we use at 
the moment. 
See my first post. ATM we are loosing whitespace information. 

just some thoughts
mario

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/54ac0ad1-6b68-4351-b238-b73d2cd81498%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-12 Thread TonyM

Josiah,

I agree with this argument, 

But I would like to add this nuance,  I do often want ways to ensure I have 
a consistent look and feel in a given solution.

Perhaps this is where people get confused, because they see having YAML yet 
another markup language as providing a consistent look and feel when all 
that is needed is some of our own personal standards.

Not withstanding the above, if we have tools available that help us provide 
consistent look and feel when we needed it, it can only be helpful. In some 
ways I rely on an understanding of TiddlyWikis standards to do this.

Tony

On Tuesday, March 13, 2018 at 6:24:39 AM UTC+11, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> Its easy to forget that TiddlyWiki is NOT WikiPedia, it is NOT Github and 
> it is NOT Reddit.
>
> Rules of text layout for server based systems with SPECIFIC purposes make 
> sense. All the big-name sites that use markup need ONE system. Its part of 
> their function to have a consistent look and feel.
>
> Not TiddlyWiki. 
>
> Whilst for its documentation and basic release its sensible to have one 
> markup system, there is no need to be a slave to any specific markup 
> methodology after that :-).
>
> Just thoughts
> Josiah
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b32fc38d-4c09-471f-a470-aaf7f32c0704%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-12 Thread Ste Wilson

Here we are.. Luatex
https://www.overleaf.com/blog/571-an-introduction-to-luatex-part-1-what-is-it-and-what-makes-it-so-different

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f194f7bd-7eb3-4aa2-a1e4-ba1006406bb1%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-12 Thread Ste Wilson

Overleaf.com had an article last month (month before..) about latex without 
latex using... Something...maybe python.. I'll admit it went over my head by 
could be worth a look. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/4a7c559b-6d04-4db0-a38c-4ca5aada6e8b%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

2018-03-12 Thread Joe Armstrong

Markdown solves the problem "make the input easy"

The problem(s) I want to solve are "make the output beautiful" 
and "make the output programmatically" when this makes sence

TW seems a pretty good compromise at these - For beautiful output
I'd have to turn TW in LaTeX of something - but I'll cross one
bridge at a time.

Cheers

/Joe


On Monday, 12 March 2018 11:57:39 UTC-7, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> One consequence of Markdown and other markups is its kinda, inadvertently, 
> supporting an incorrect idea about writing and the nature of most 
> documents. 
>
> The point is that most of them *assume that we need to ADD EXPLICIT 
> MARKUP in order to render texts correctly*. The underlying idea is that 
> "all documents are equally unstructured" so need markup help.
>
> That is COMPLETELY INCORRECT. 
>
> Most documents folk write are within a TYPE that is already structured 
> according to conventions. Parsers, given the correct document TYPE, can 
> usually render a document correctly WITHOUT explicit markup. Markup ONLY 
> being needed to force compliance when a section of text breaks the standard 
> layout of the type. 
>
> A very good example of this is screenplays. Their plain text typed layout 
> already mostly determines how (IMPLICITLY) they should be "marked up" for 
> render. The Fountain Syntax  for marking up 
> screenplays is perhaps the best public example of a brilliant "Minimalist 
> Markup"--mostly you need to add nothing explicit because the work is done 
> simply by analysing the layout of the document.
>
> Other examples would be most novels, much poetry and sophisticated legal 
> documents.
>
> These kinds of cases we should be able to support directly in TW quite 
> easily, I think.
>
> Thoughts
> Josiah 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b85141b7-55d7-4918-bc25-6fc1fcc8fc96%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

Its easy to forget that TiddlyWiki is NOT WikiPedia, it is NOT Github and 
it is NOT Reddit.

Rules of text layout for server based systems with SPECIFIC purposes make 
sense. All the big-name sites that use markup need ONE system. Its part of 
their function to have a consistent look and feel.

Not TiddlyWiki. 

Whilst for its documentation and basic release its sensible to have one 
markup system, there is no need to be a slave to any specific markup 
methodology after that :-).

Just thoughts
Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/8b3ca994-e646-4ad4-818f-a95f369bb8cc%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

One consequence of Markdown and other markups is its kinda, inadvertently,
supporting an incorrect idea about writing and the nature of most
documents.

The point is that most of them *assume that we need to ADD EXPLICIT MARKUP
in order to render texts correctly*. The underlying idea is that "all
documents are equally unstructured" so need markup help.

That is COMPLETELY INCORRECT.

Most documents folk write are within a TYPE that is already structured
according to conventions. Parsers, given the correct document TYPE, can
usually render a document correctly WITHOUT explicit markup. Markup ONLY
being needed to force compliance when a section of text breaks the standard
layout of the type.

A very good example of this is screenplays. Their plain text typed layout
already mostly determines how (IMPLICITLY) they should be "marked up" for
render. The Fountain Syntax for marking up
screenplays is perhaps the best public example of a brilliant "Minimalist
Markup"--mostly you need to add nothing explicit because the work is done
simply by analysing the layout of the document.

Other examples would be most novels, much poetry and sophisticated legal
documents.

These kinds of cases we should be able to support directly in TW quite
easily, I think.

Thoughts
Josiah

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/152a0cfb-fe47-446a-9f60-87967007f64c%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

>
> Joe Armstrong wrote: Tiddlers contain far more than markup. There's wiki 
> text with an embedded programming language and an implicit environment ...
>

Absolutely.

Part of the issue with discussing "Markup" is being clear what is what. 
Whilst stuff like the syntax for transclusions is another level than simple 
text substitution for html/css, in reality, for users it is empirically at 
the SAME level--its all about typing stuff into text that does stuff on 
render.

But much of the confusion/complication on conversion of different "Markup" 
systems stem from this--that at USER level there is one system of entry, 
but at programmatic level there can be several different things that are 
not so easy to "translate". 

The originally stricter meanings of (narrow) "markup" & (programmatic) 
"syntax" have blurred. 

Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/caa9cb48-07f0-4b86-98f2-8a4a0e1a6fc8%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly

As far as publicly documented wiki markup systems go TW is not much on the 
map.

It is NOT in the Babelmark Registry 
.

Nobody is bending to create convertors to it.

But TW's basic architecture is, in fact, VERY flexible. 

In truth, its got an AGNOSTIC PARSER SYSTEM that could convert most 
anything to anything. This is unlike most other wiki systems which are far 
less modular or flexible.

IMO, we are under-selling TiddlyWiki's potential for variant markup.

In theory it would be possible to support many more markup systems than it 
currently does. And without major changes to its architecture. 

Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/3caa3673-f496-45ca-80eb-ec3dc6965c14%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: Issue: I'd like to talk about Markup---broadly