On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 11:16:15 PM UTC+1, TonyM wrote: ... > It makes me wonder if we need a kind of "escape character", behind which > custom markup can be defined, but ignored if not handled by the recipient > wiki. A field and its content could cause such an alternate markup or the > type field. Perhaps copy to clipboard, and copy, export could include an > option to ignore especially escaped markup. >
hmmm, I don't think so. .. Prose wikitext is defined in a way, that it should make sense for most humans, even if the plain text isn't wikified at all. eg: There is something //strange// going on in this text. At the moment, if the parser doesn't understand any wikitext formatting, it displays it as text. So the user "can/should" make sense of it. I think this mechanism should stay. "Eating" unknown markup, for me is like "hiding information". ... You probably know, I'm against hiding information. Advanced markup like widgets will display an error message: eg: <$unknown/> ...Undefined widget 'unknown' ... IMO that's OK. We already have the \rules only/except pragma at the beginning of tiddler texts. We may be able to create a \rules use <regexp> dot-paragraph ... Which can do something sensible, if the "dot-paragraph" inline parser is missing. eg: hide the leading dot, but show a "dot-paragraph parser is missing" message somewhere. ... A more intelligent solution would be an "import the missing stuff" dialogue ;) -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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c243eb7d-a242-4c48-b55c-edb3d9001c76%40googlegroups.com.
