TT
Thant sounds correct, but I seem to suffer from dyslexia with Regex, I know
it just needs time on task, practice etc...
Tones
On Sunday, 30 August 2020 03:02:26 UTC+10, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> Ciao TonyM
>
> Good stuff!
>
> I think it is worth *underlining* that you are interested in LINE
> AWARENESS.
>
> That the scope of some(?) of what you want is line (i.e. /^.+\n/gm) NOT
> the standard paragraph (i.e. /^.*\n\n+/gm)
>
> Best wishes
> TT
>
> On Saturday, 29 August 2020 04:24:51 UTC+2, TonyM wrote:
>>
>> TT,
>>
>> Offline I and Mario were working on a dot paragraph solution, perhaps a
>> § paragraph, » or leading ⁋ paragraph, or trailing ¶ paragraph or
>> <dot><space><space> at the end of a "line". The character is somewhat
>> irrelevant for considering the idea.
>> However we have moved away from dot as it works as .classname.
>>
>> *In someways the key is a markup character you can use on a line that has
>> no other markup character.*
>>
>> What we have discovered however we do this, the special character can be
>> followed with a .classname and in fact .clasname.classname to apply
>> multiple; so we found this simple example
>>
>> .i { margin-left: 3em;}
>> .ii { margin-left: 6em;}
>>
>> .r { margin-right: 3em;}
>> .rr { margin-right: 6em;}
>>
>> .j { text-align: justify; text-justify: auto; }
>>
>> Allowing
>>
>> Using the above css its simple to use
>>
>> ».ii.rr,j Paragraph line here indented twice both left and right side,
>> and justified.
>>
>> Or set and indent a paragraph twice
>> »»» Paragraph line here indented twice
>>
>> Keep in mind the .classname is already available with other markup *, # ;
>> : etc... not that you would indent an "indent markup" but you may color it
>> and more.
>>
>> In composed tiddlers, or pasted text it would be easy to apply a level of
>> markup via css if there is the leading character to trigger the option of
>> .classname
>>
>> - Unlike @@ .mystyle you do not have to close it, it autoclosed at \n
>> or end of line @@ and seriousely @@ is obstructive.
>> - Perhaps we need a block line (paragraph), multi-line block and
>> inline versions?
>>
>> Just sharing some thoughts
>> Regards
>> Tony
>>
>>
>> On Friday, 28 August 2020 at 17:20:39 UTC+10 @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>>
>>> Mat wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We'd get infinite options if one could use §1, §2, ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> That sounds like a shift away from "Markdown Like" ... In that the
>>> character pair is "code for something" ... one might argue that "<<<
>>> ...<<<" is already not that Markdown Like. Its an interesting question. In
>>> earlier discussions with TonyM using a "universal prefix" came up.
>>> Extending on that idea, for instance starting a line with a full-stop, or
>>> whatever ...
>>>
>>> .§ = activate Mat style Custom Wikitext pragma for "§"
>>> .d = activate screenplay Dialogue styling
>>>
>>> These approaches remain nicely compact but are not ideal "Markdown
>>> Like"--plain text readability is not brilliant. That said, once you use up
>>> available characters with meaning its a viable alternative.
>>>
>>> Another approach it to add NO EXPLICIT MARKUP AT ALL but construct a
>>> pragma that via regex analyses pattern of text in line. That works easily
>>> for highly structured texts. For instance any line of a "transition" in a
>>> script (like "CUT TO:" or "FADE OUT:") are easily identified by pattern
>>> without adding any markup & can be styled appropriately. The text in these
>>> cases is "its own markup". I often wonder if that "silent" approach could
>>> be extended to more conventional text.
>>>
>>> It would be useful if TW could work as a custom markup
>>>> constructor+interpretator.
>>>
>>>
>>> (Possibly the character should trigger more than mere CSS. I would guess
>>>> pipe characters, when creating wikitext tables, do this, right? In that
>>>> case, § could trigger some user defined *macro*, perhaps titled §
>>>> ...or §1, §2... to operate on the text snippet in question.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not so sure about extending this into basically a command parser :-)
>>> . If you going pragma route then its possible, but focus on simple
>>> insertion of styled elements is quite a lot to get working well for one
>>> pragma already.
>>>
>>> How many many pragma were you thinking of? :-)
>>>
>>> I do think a "kitchen sink" pragma (i.e. does a bunch of different
>>> things at once) is probably not a good idea. On this, extending beyond
>>> element styling, to "interpret activity insertion" some use cases are
>>> needed to think with.
>>>
>>> My further thoughts
>>> TT
>>>
>>>
>>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/c5e817d7-93ee-4469-a8b9-5af68847ad98o%40googlegroups.com.
