On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 09:14:14AM -0400, John Nowak wrote: > Markdown's main goal is to be readable as plain text, i.e., it should > have full meaning even if never parsed. I don't have access to the > edit pages on the plan 9 wiki to compare. A lot of thought has gone > into Markdown. Depending on what you mean by "the look ... of the > wiki syntax", it may be worth a look. If you just mean a clean syntax > for markup, with the readability as a document in and of itself does > not really matter, Markdown is not the right choice (too verbose > mainly, perhaps too much freedom). If you want the syntax for the > wiki to double as distributable text file documentation, you'd be > hard-pressed to do better than Markdown. (I'd be interested in the > results of your efforts if you try however.)
Actually I like this Markdown stuff (didn't knew it before). Even if it is written in perl, I'd consider to integrate that into a ruby taggi. (maybe it is easy to convert it to ruby, dunno). Regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe ><>< www.ebrag.de ><>< GPG key: 0D73F361 _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://wmii.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wmii
