On 8 February 2012 15:06, Oren Bochman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think that an xml subset is the ideal should be the underlying format. It's > the best known technology, has mature development tools. > It could be parsed to and written to most efficiently by browser, and even > the editor could be simplified by using it. This is likely. But the magical key to the issue is: it doesn't actually matter. The important thing about the eventual intermediate format is that it will be *properly defined* and can be manipulated. It will be things that are processed in a particular way. This format could be stored in whatever format is convenient - XML, bytecode, cat GIFs, a version of the existing wikitext format - as a properly defined syntax, we can arbitrarily transform any version into any other version as needed. Hopefully this is possible ... - d. _______________________________________________ Wikitext-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitext-l
