2008/2/21, DanTMan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I hardly see how that is any different, as a simple regex will easily > match both. Any further, and we're doing it in a way which we can't convert > existing WikiText into tags... And then we're right back at the notion of > ditching WikiText without converting it, which as I've already explained is > insane. > > Then there's the notion of XML structures being cleaner, easier to parse, > and not to difficult to read. > And half that is bull. > Sure, a XML language is good for a parser. > But cleaner... That's starting to push it. > And not to difficult to read... > That's just crap. There's no way a pile of <>'s all over the text is > anywhere near easy to read, and to someone who doesn't even understand XML > that's just bull. > WikiText was designed to be able to be editable by nearly anyone. An XML > language will never be clean enough for the average person to edit. > And like I said, don't state any crap about them using WYSIWYG. There are > plenty of users who can't use a WYSIWYG editor and will need to be able to > edit plain text. And a XML based language isn't anywhere near friendly for > them. > > You forgot to add some shits, with or without them, your writing can't get dirtier.
_______________________________________________ Wikitext-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitext-l
