On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 13:25 +0100, Daniel Kinzler wrote: > Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> Through this mailing-list, I see that we are struggling with Wikitext, > >> which > >> is a time-consuming work. What I suggest is, instead of wasting more time, > >> we can change to XML, which is clearer, easy to parse, easy to understand > >> and easy to extend. > > > > You want an XML based language for describing the formatting of > > webpages? Basically, you're suggesting we switch to XHTML (with more > > some features removed and a few added). XHTML is much harder to learn > > and use than wikitext, even for experienced users. > > XHTML would only be good for the formatting aspects. It can't represent parser > functions, template calls, etc. XML lets you mix and match vocabularies, of > course. > > -- Daniel >
For the average user I believe Wikitext to be the easiest to learn, however I am not an expert on the technical aspects and ressources used by using Wikitext. On the subject of creating a WYSIWYG editor, I don't believe this is the best solution. Instead, the current editor could be expanded to include forms similar to many popular Blog softwares, e.g. Wordpress. For example, if a user wants to include an image this is quite easy for an experienced user, however for a beginner it can be quite complicated. If instead a dialog would appear asking for various parameters, for example size, thumb, description and alignment, this would make it a lot more simpler - no matter if the result get's displayed as Wikitext or WYSIWYG. Ian [[User:Poeloq]] --- Ian A Holton Blog: http://www.ianholton.net
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Wikitext-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitext-l
