(anonymous guest) (logged out)

Copyright (C) by the contributors. Some rights reserved, license BY-SA.

Sponsored by the Wiki Symposium and the Nuveon GmbH.

 
View Attach Info

Add new attachment

Only authorized users are allowed to upload new attachments.

This page (revision-43) was last changed on 26-Sep-2007 09:06 by ChuckSmith  

This page was created on 29-Aug-2006 01:46 by 85.221.141.46

Only authorized users are allowed to rename pages.

Only authorized users are allowed to delete pages.

Difference between version and

At line 97 changed one line
Don't see creole as a standard repleacing your markup, please. Take a look at the [Implementation] alternatives, like the "extra creole edit button", that will keep your markup completely seperate from creole. This button will make wikis inviting for people that might be an asset to communities using your engine, but don't know your markup.
Don't see creole as a standard replacing your markup, please. Take a look at the [Implementation] alternatives, like the "extra creole edit button", that will keep your markup completely separate from creole. This button will make wikis inviting for people that might be an asset to communities using your engine, but don't know your markup.
At line 105 added 13 lines
The main difference between headings and inline emphasis is that headings create structure of your document, labeling its parts, while inline emphasis merely distinguishes part of the paragraph text. Again, the presentation of both is out of the user's control, as it is defined in the style. Headings can, for example, be totally hidden and only appear in the table of contents. Emphasis, as Thomas mentioned, can be done using foreground or background colors, different font, different font style, weight, variant, size, decoration, even position.
If you insist on consistency between the {{{//}}} and {{{**}}} markup and its presentation on the rendered page, then the markup is purely visual, not semantic, and visual formatting tags, like {{{<i>}}} and {{{<b>}}} should be therefore used instead of {{{<em>}}} and {{{<strong>}}}.
I think it's a question of decision whether the markup is visual or semantic. Once this is decided, the rest is easy to sort out.
Note that indeed "semantic" markup requires some dose of "symbolic" thinking, which people learn pretty late in their life. If you are catering to kids and young teenagers, "visual" markup is much easier to introduce, while the idea of "semantic" markup might be even impossible to explain.
-- [RadomirDopieralski], 2006-09-14
For me wiki markup was and is a simplification for mere mortals (not only kids and young teenagers), a compromise. It is leightweight markup. I don't have the perfect answer. When i search for a word that was in italics in the normal display, and I then try to spot it in the wiki markup it's easier for me when the markup distinguishes bold and italics visually. When in doubt about a markup element, I, would vote for visual when it comes to creole. Again, you always can use the native markup.
-- [Christoph], 15-Sep-2006
At line 143 added 31 lines
----
I like the semantic meaning way better than the formatting aspects of text markup (goes with the use of styles in wordprocessors). In French, there are no consensus about the usage of bold and italics. Some groups say that we should never use bold (nor underline). Others make a difference between emphasis (bold) and citations/references/borrowed words/new terms (italics). Underline is allowed only for hyperlinks.
My suggestion is to accept everything and to let the [[language dependant] implementation decides of the presentation.
{{{
__some words__, **some words**, //some words// express emphasis
}}}
-- [EricChartre], 2006-12-28
---------
== 2007-01-23 How to handle invalid bold/italic
[[WankerRoot]]: Hi there, the [[Creole0.3]] specs says that such bold/italic mixes are "unacceptable": {{{ //**bold-italic//**}}}. But - how shall the interpreter handle it? I was unsure so I decided for [[http://www.daemon.de/PodWiki|PodWiki]] to correct the invalid code and render it anyhow, [[http://www.daemon.de/CreoleWhat|Here is how it looks]]. My question is: is this the intended way to handle this? Any comments? - kind regards.
RadomirDopieralski: I don't think there is one and only good one way of handling such malformed markup -- and I think that different parsers will handle it differently. The important thing to remember is to never just ignore characters and eat them silently. So there are a few options: 1) Ignore the markup and display the characters verbatim, indicating this way that something is wrong with them, 2) First "{{{//}}}" starts italics, first "{{{**}}}" starts bold, then there is the text "{{{bold-italic}}}", then: 2.1) second "{{{//}}}" ends both the bold and the italic, second "{{{**}}}" starts a new bold span, that ends with the end of paragraph, 2.2) second "{{{//}}}" is treated as normal text (as there is no active italic span to close), second "{{{**}}}" closes the bold span, the rest of text is italic until the end of paragraph. 3a) only "{{{//}}}" are treated as markup, "{{{**}}}" is treated as normal text, 3b) the other way around, only "{{{**}}}" are treated as markup, "{{{//}}}" is treated as normal text, 4) your parser uses some heuristics and properly guesses what the user meant. To my understanding of the [Goals], especially __there is no wrong way to implement Creole__, each of these approaches is correct.
----
I know this is almost decided markup... but I'm not yet 100% sure we should discard email-style emphasis, like in [[Crossmark]]. I mean, using single slashes or stars instead of double. That's more readable, more intuitive and widespread. If we introduce a way to escape slashes and stars, then I don't think it will conflict seriously with normal text.
I know this option (single slashes and stars) has problems. I would just like to hear others' opinions.
-- MicheleTomaiuolo, 2007-02-07
I know Oddmuse accepts both single and double characters for bold and italics, so I would say that is optional. Again, ExtensibleByOmission.
-- ChuckSmith, 2007-Feb-07
Version Date Modified Size Author Changes ... Change note
43 26-Sep-2007 09:06 13.375 kB ChuckSmith to previous restore
42 26-Sep-2007 01:00 13.415 kB 218.58.136.4 to previous | to last
41 26-Sep-2007 00:59 13.404 kB 59.45.211.51 to previous | to last
« This page (revision-43) was last changed on 26-Sep-2007 09:06 by ChuckSmith