| At line 1 changed one line |
| There was a proposal on [Talk.Line breaks] to change the line break markup from the "blog-like" one to the "wiki-like" approach. |
| %%commentbox |
| There was a proposal on [[Talk.Line breaks]] to change the line break markup from the "blog-like" one to the "wiki-like" approach. |
| At line 3 changed one line |
| Change now part of official [Creole 0.4] proposal. |
| Change now part of official [[Creole 0.4]] proposal. |
| At line 6 added 2 lines |
| We investigated in the different variants of wiki linebreak syntax in [[List Of Line Break Markup]]. On [[Line Break Case Studies]] we collect realworld examples of new users of wiki software and how they tried to paste in text. |
|
| At line 6 changed one line |
| ---- |
|
| %% |
|
| At line 16 changed 3 lines |
| ** for poems, |
| ** for addresses, |
| ** for code. |
| ** for poems, |
| ** for addresses, |
| ** for code. |
| At line 20 changed 2 lines |
| ** hard to detect when an user means {{{<br>}}} and when {{{</p>}}}, |
| ** special cases for ignoring newlines at the beginning or end of blocks like <pre>. |
| ** hard to detect when an user means {{{<br>}}} and when {{{</p>}}}, |
| ** special cases for ignoring newlines at the beginning or end of blocks like <pre>. |
| At line 26 changed 2 lines |
| ** when copying from the wiki using this, |
| ** when copying from e-mails, documents, etc. into a wiki using this. |
| ** when copying from the wiki using this, |
| ** when copying from e-mails, documents, etc. into a wiki using this. |
| At line 48 changed one line |
| * makes users confuse line breaks with paragraph ends. |
| * makes users confuse line breaks with paragraph ends, |
| * makes users surprised if non-default style (especially spacing) is used for paragraphs, |
| * the source is hard to process automatically (by various wikibots). |
| At line 66 changed one line |
| * makes users familiar with world-wide standards. |
| * makes users familiar with world-wide standards, |
| * doesn't suggest one and only one formatting, |
| * encourages use of other markup, which makes it easier to style the page and to process the sources automatically. |
| At line 88 added 44 lines |
|
| ==The Third Alternative: Paragraph-like line breaks== |
| Single newlines are treated as paragraph breaks or paragraph-like (lists, table rows) markups endings except in preformatted blocks where they are taken literally. Two (or more) consecutive newlines are treated as a single paragraph break. To force a line break, use a separate markup (like {{{\\}}}). To force a paragraph break, use a separate markup (like {{{\\\}}}). |
|
| Newlines after forced breaks breaks are ignored. Forced line breaks and paragraph breaks can be used in lists and tables. They do not start a new item or row. |
|
| ===Advantages=== |
| * __Compatible with most well-written wiki articles (here, WikiPedia, etc.)__ |
| * In sync with the behavior of most modern word processors. The enter key generates a pilcrow. Lotus WordPro (formerly AmiPro), WordPerfect, OpenOffice and the default template in Microsoft Word 2007 render pilcrows as paragraphs (with an obvious space between the lines). |
| * __Compatible with most modern mechanical typewriters.__ |
| * Allows for semantically-rich lists and tables. |
| * Easy to parse. |
| * The user cannot override the page layout by using more newlines (only with forced breaks). Forced breaks allows for error-free freedom (the users know what it will do). |
| * The text is the important thing. Presentation is secondary. Newlines have a semantic meaning. The user does not have to worry about how good the text looks. |
| * Allows for users to use two or more newlines in the source text without worrying about the presentation. |
| * Very easy to clean-up spurious newlines and forced breaks. |
| * __Comfortable for copywriters who can use them to structure the source.__ |
| * Can be easily converted to blog-style new lines when needed, |
| * Leaves the web designer in control of spacing and layout. |
| * Makes it easy to change the layout without editing every page in a wiki. |
| * Does not require the user to be experienced in typography or arts, |
| * Keeps the paragraphs and line breaks as separate ideas, |
| * __Could make copy and paste easier on some platforms.__ |
| * __Allows posting text with wrapped lines without the need of additional reformatting,__ |
| * Makes users familiar with word processing best practices |
| * Doesn't suggest one and only one formatting. |
| * Encourages use of other markup, which makes it easier to style the page and to process the sources automatically. |
| * __Users have no limited way to express__ |
| ===Disadvantages=== |
| * Requires a line wrapping editor or text area. |
| * The rule is simpler for basic tasks but more complex for advanced tasks (forced breaks). |
| * The behavior of newlines paragraph-like markups (lists, tables) is different than in normal text. |
| * The distinction between a line break and a paragraph break is not obvious in the default template of Microsoft Word 2003 and earlier versions. |
| * __Could break some ill-formatted articles.__ |
| * Harder to use in texts that require lots of line breaks (like poetry). |
| * Not mainstream in current Wiki engines. [New|NotNew] in the Wiki universe. |
| * Could make the source text harder to scan and find relevant fragments, |
| * Could generate extra paragraph breaks with copy and paste on some platforms. |
| * Requires a huge change in the Creole specification. |
| * Requires enclosing pasted code, ascii-art, poems and addresses into additional markup (or using forced line break), |
| * Frustrates users (at first) that are not familiar to this behavior. |
| * Users need to learn the markup for the elements they want to use, instead of approximating them with line breaks and indentation, |
| * Users can be surprised with the effect if they create their first wiki page without ever looking at and editing existing wiki pages, |
| * SPAM looks like ventilated SPAM. |
.