I'm skeptical about the hard-copy or PDF virtual hard-copy. You could make a couple pages using conventional CSS/TW markup and then see if it prints out like you want. I think you might find that getting page breaks to work reasonably is challenging.
Good luck, Mark On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 8:38:28 AM UTC-7, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: > > Ciao Mark S. > > Thanks for GOOD questions. > > For movie scripts outputs MUST follow the format to have any chance. The > spec is precise. This is why you must have access to a physical print-out > to mail that follows the convention, NOT a GUESS. OR an exactly laid out > PDF could do. > > I think TW can do that natively. But it needs thought yet. > > Josiah > > On Thursday, 31 August 2017 17:09:00 UTC+2, Mark S. wrote: >> >> Working out what you want in a parser in terms of inputs and outputs is a >> good idea. >> >> I'm wondering what the point of this exercise would be? How would you use >> the outputs? My experience with all things HTML is that it doesn't print >> out reliably. So you probably couldn't depend on it to produce physical >> manuscripts. So, unless you could convince directors/actors/reviewers to >> read scripts on their tablets (hmm, maybe they already do this?) what >> would be the benefit of using TW? >> >> Have fun, >> Mark >> >> >> On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:17:48 AM UTC-7, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>> >>> TonyM >>> >>> The aim is implicitly voiced in the other thread this emerged from ... >>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tiddlywiki/9Lf0YHfMUZk ... but >>> it needs work to get it optimised for TW, IMO. >>> >>> Looking at Fountain <https://fountain.io/syntax>, that thread deals >>> with its markup system for screenplays--I think it could be simplified for >>> TW a lot. >>> >>> The UNDERLYING ISSUE is whether a "deep level" Javascript parser *(and >>> likely a new "content type") *is needed OR whether you can get away >>> with a more surface level set of regular expressions. The RegEx I can sorta >>> cope with. The Javascript I can't. >>> >>> The BASIC markup I'm thinking is only this ... >>> >>> :x >>> >>> Each LINE started by a colon and a letter code is parsed and wrapped in >>> different CSS classes. >>> >>> Right now I'm trying to establish the tech needs for this. >>> >>> PMario opined it wasn't possible without JavaScript coding. >>> >>> Best wishes >>> Josiah >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, 31 August 2017 14:57:20 UTC+2, TonyM wrote: >>>> >>>> Just a question. Why build a parser when there are ways to parse the >>>> content in a tiddlywiki already. I would have thought What is it you want >>>> to achieve is best voiced first. >>>> >>>> Ok, maybe I don't get it but I expect the same could be said for >>>> theatrical script writing as well unless it is critical to import a >>>> different markup in which case you could work on the import and export >>>> process instead. >>>> >>>> Food for thought? >>>> >>>> Otherwise clueless >>>> Tony >>>> >>>> -- 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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/c4c784f8-3772-4d69-b837-a3f6af191520%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
