> > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:43:56 PM UTC+7, Jeremy Ruston wrote: > > I thought I remember coming across a TW plugin that handled hard return > > issues, doesn't that make use of <p> tags? > > As I've said before, I do plan to explore "fixing" the standard > TiddlyWiki wikifier in TW5 so that it does emit the expected <p> tags. > I was just recalling an "in the meantime" fix - I'm sure we'll find many users will be using "old-school" TWs for quite some time even after TW5 ships a stable release. . .
> > The absolute ideal IMO would be a core TW architecture that allowed for > user > > choice of internally-stored syntax, with or without appropriate rendering > > and input assistance. Zim's author is intending to head down that road in > > future. > > I think that's where TW5 is. You can store tiddlers in what ever type > you like. The system looks for a parser that can convert each > particular MIME type into HTML. So, you'll be able to, for instance, > whip up a MarkDown parser (perhaps based on ShowDown), and then store > excellent! > > Second best is export capability to one or more "standard" syntaxes > to support Txt2tags and/or Pandoc - I'm now leaning toward the latter, > so leading candidates are extended markdown or reST/Sphinx. > > For general, interoperable export I was thinking that HTML would be useful. > For structured output, say DocBook as an extreme example, but anywhere you might want things like standardized footnotes, bibliographic citations, multiple end-matter hierarchical indexes etc. HTML just doesn't offer semantically rich enough features. You'd have to create rigid SOP rules for users to follow for the HTML to be consistent enough to be "upgrade converted" to the more structured formats like AsciiDoc or Sphinx. Everything outputs *to* HTML, that's the easy part, but going the other way is very difficult if you're dealing with anything more than a flat "sea of tiddlers". Pandoc will work equally well with markdown+its own extensions and the relevant subset of reST. It also uses json-based structures internally, and can accept these directly as input, but I believe they're not fully documented. > > Worst case is adding a "reader" for TW-specific syntax to Pandoc, which > will then be able to output to any of its dozen+ target output formats. In > which case a Pandoc "writer" for txt2tags and/or Asciidoc (which I believe > is in the dev version) would make things pretty complete. > > I imagine it might be useful if Pandoc were able to support TW5 wikitext. > Definitely, especially if there were standardized representations for those features that map to the meta-structures discussed above. > > My understanding is that these wouldn't be too hard for an experienced > > programmer. If I need to learn to program, I'm not sure if Haskell's the > > language to start with but they say most important is a relevant > real-world > > project to motivate you. 8-) > > On those grounds it might be reasonable to learn JavaScript? > I've read that because of its flexibility, JS isn't the best choice as a first language, I was thinking Python? But to be honest I'll probably still be wishing I had the money (=freedom/time) to go "back to school" on my deathbed, I'm over 50 and just started a new family, two lovely babies. . . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/GmIvrdzDRy8J. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
