PMario and all I been thinking about all this. Especially markup symbols.
Looking back at Gruber 2004. At that time you were stuck visually on glyphs between a rock & a hard place. We are no longer so constrained. MY POINT? Let us ensure we are VISUALLY free on markup symbols, not get stuck in 2004 code pages :-). A thought TT On Saturday, 26 September 2020 13:57:05 UTC+2, PMario wrote: > > On Saturday, September 26, 2020 at 1:33:40 PM UTC+2, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: > > Quick point. In my USE CASE I'm interested in using CSS classes AS the >> "code" /. shorthand (actual end-user text is inserted via CSS *::before >> *) . The user would see NO comprehensible text at all if they opened a >> Tiddler in edit mode ... They would see stuff like this ... >> >> °.x-4x >> °A.standard-back >> >> etc ... >> > > OK. ... That's interesting. > > >> My point in my OP was to open-up what "readable" means. My "shorthand" is >> totally readable to me. It produces (in render) ... >> >> On all fours. First attend your back. Can you form a mental image of >> where it is in space? >> >> I don't think that approach is like Gruber Markdown at all. But the >> concepts Gruber initiated have had enormous shaping influence on how we >> think about markup. Especially in wikis. >> > > It's true, readability is different for every user. ... My intention is, > to allow "styling" markup like .x-4x directly after the ID like: °.x-4x > but if the user chooses to make the wikitext more "verbose" they can move > the "cryptic" elements into the _params parameter and define a wikitext > like so: °this-and-that-should-happen ... > > For me it's important that both variants work. > > So when PMario talks about "readability" I want to push it :-) I think >> what he means is text in *"Gruber mode"*. I.e. part of normal language >> use with markup symbols that compliment that. >> > > That's right, as written above. > > >> But PMario's tool actually opens up totally what "readability" could be. >> When you start thinking this through it gets liberating. >> > > Yes. That's the intention. > > >> TBH Tony, I don't think it is a programming syntax per se (in my use case >> it is just standard CSS, there is NO programmatic logic. Its simple text >> SUBSTITUTION). >> > > >> The easiest was I could describe it is "*Private Shorthand Supporting >> Public Messaging*". >> > > That's 1 usecase and it has been the initial one :) > > >> It is provision of an efficient method for supporting AUTHOR writing >> methods. Full stop. >> > > yes .. over and out (for this post) q;-) > > -mario > -- 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/d5e41e23-47e8-4b40-bd47-6811739d3116o%40googlegroups.com.
