On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:14 AM, Erik Rose <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is one of the most important and hotly debated questions abotu the new >> parser design: should it allow syntactically incomplete templates, or not? > > Yes, it's got all sorts of wonderful technical advantages: a DB-less > translation from markup to DOM is nothing to be sneered at. Though I can > throw out this cautionary tale: our old MW parser implementation didn't allow > these "partial" templates, and our writers have spent maybe a dozen hours > fruitlessly trying various crazy ways to factor up collections of common > bullet points for use in lists of instructions.
There is the tempting but unclean (unclean!!) option of disallowing partial templates, then cleaning up certain constructs afterwards. A series of <ul></ul> nodes can be merged into one in DOM or text/regexp etc. That would allow for mostly hack-less templates and clean parsing, at the price of bespoke markup magick fixes in the end. Just sayin'... Magnus _______________________________________________ Wikitext-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitext-l
