Fred Drake wrote: > On 10/11/05, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>- a ZWiki on a bare Zope 2 is set up within minutes > > A ZWiki as found on the current zope.org is unusable, so I'll presume > you mean an up-to-date ZWiki, which I expect is much nicer.
Of course. >>Again (and I'm saying this again with the possibility of being stamped >>as repitive): The last thing I need for writing proposals or posting >>comments on the wiki is a WYSIWYG editor. > > > Agreed. A WYSIWYG editor doesn't help, and makes the thing more > fragile. I would hope a plain text editor would still be an option, > even if we get stuck with HTML as the wiki markup (another point of > contention, I suspect). > > >>We've been writing STX for >>years, maybe reST would be nice so that the proposal posted on the wiki > > > If we don't have reST, then we haven't made any progress. Jim said a > few years ago that reST would be the standard for Zope 3 > documentation, and few people have really picked up on that. That's a > shame, because it's so much nicer and more predictable than STX. (It > also doesn't get the indentation of code fragments wrong.) > > These opinions are my own, and have not been filtered through Jim. :-) I love reST just as much as you do. Fortunately, ZWiki has been supporting reST for a long time now, so no worries there. I agree that an improved development home without reST support isn't improved at all. Btw, I think that Zope 3 is doing pretty well wrt reST (not counting the wiki pages for now). The only reST-ish but not fully reST-like file that I can think of is CHANGES.txt. But I'm not going to reindent that sucker... ;) Philipp _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3email@example.com Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com