@TiddlyTweeter No, it is not my normal name :-)
I agree with you and Arlen Beiler regarding the *p*s. It has three aspects: - *p*s are better than *br*s because *p* is semantic and *br* is not. *p* is also easier to parse. - but wrapping *div*s into *p*s results in invalid html (structurally and semantically). - It also causes problems with the CSS styling (eg. one can not remove the margin from the *p* based on its children. That would require a parent selector like :has <http://chris.house/blog/thinking-about-the-has-css-selector/> but that is not supported <https://caniuse.com/css-has>). A div should actually just behave like a div in html5 and always close a p. For example the parsetree from here <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/blob/master/editions/dev/tiddlers/from%20tw5.com/mechanisms/ParsingMechanism.tid#L24> currently gets transformed to this DOM: p "Some " em "italics" " and a " tiddler ... "." but it should be this DOM: p "Some " em "italics" " and a " tiddler ... p "." But i can not clearly think about this right now, im tired, see you tomorrow -- 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/aca69368-453d-4ab3-a5c5-00defd0d4f40%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
