It seems to me that TW's flex would support A THOUSAND MARKUP SYSTEMS.

But I think we need a debate to loosen the strictures. And also make 
clearer how TW parses.

To try open this up I want to comment that recently we had discussion of 
mediating imports to TW via Pandoc. Behind this is the idea of THE FORMATS. 
BIG sites we want to steal from in a renderable way via an intermediary.

All good.

I'm rather more interested directly in TiddlyWiki in advancing BESPOKE 
MARKUP. Markup systems that users invent for purposes directly in TW make 
typing content easier.

Does anyone know what I am talking about?

-- 
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/fd4eefef-d216-4696-a0e3-bb0bbc34d22d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to