Yes. Jeremy made a careful Text-Slicer edition 
<https://tiddlywiki.com/editions/text-slicer/>.

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 <tiddly...@assays.tv 
> <javascript:>> 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 <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com 
>> <javascript:>.
>> 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
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f14591a6-f08d-482e-a80e-f10953d57171%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> 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.

Reply via email to