[Pmwiki-users] Re: -Balu- sleek syntax

[J. Meijer]

Thomas -Balu- Walter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:44:46PM +0100, J. Meijer wrote:
>> I have this sleek new syntax with powerful macro-styles and more
predictable
>> line-break behaviour. I am working on a flat "PmWiki-style" hierarchy and
>> free skinning. All worthy of being part of what defines a PmWiki 2.0.
>
>I'm not sure if we should go that way, but is there a chance to see the
>new markup already?
>
>    Balu

Sure you will see it. I have a prototype functioning, but its span of
application is frustrated by pmw1. There are also some details left to
settle. I guess I could demonstrate the syntax without an implementation,
but I am not sure whether or not I want to debate it, go over all the detail
and why. Unless some commitment appears I'll hold off showing it till I have
a pmw2 extension working to back up my claims, for you to enjoy.


<propaganda>

The power stems from the fact that the syntax supports nesting, which is a
thing most wikis lack. It's also the thing that most frustrates me in
pmwiki. It means things always work the way you intend them to work, no
surprises.

Though replacing a large subset of the markup, it does not affect things
like bullet lists and tables (didn't think about those). Some features:
- ability to markup a single word, phrase, paragraph, entire text or any
section selected.
- integrated styles, like wiki-styles but not requiring a special syntax.
- ability to define hyperlinks and styles as footnotes, outside of the main
text.
- uniform and obvious syntax construct, mostly no manual required :-)
- clean and readable format, though nesting naturally complicates looks.
- language neutral and the full expressive power of html.
- ability to markup quotes or database queries.
- ability of self-description, can boot or extend itself from a page.
- adding hover-text is natural; easy to set colors, margins and sizes.
- supports embedded page-structures.
- sos-mode shows how the syntax was read and interpreted.

This too is a compromise. Some negative points:
- no familiar **bold** //italics// @@mono@@ and __underline__ markups
- the new syntax is sometimes more compact, sometimes more elaborate then
these.
- not simplistic, the thing that graces many wiki's and certainly pmwiki,
for better and for worse.

Any syntax competes with a WYSIWYG future, but has merits of its own. Maybe
the WYSIWYG editors will allow us to use our own back-end syntax. That would
be the way to go and this syntax allows it, so I guess it won't be obsolete
overnight.

The syntax is compatible with the current, but giving users the option would
create confusion.

I'd like to see some support, based on these merits alone:
1. Ability to nest constructs (which makes writing content more
deterministic, less frustrating);
2. Ability to survive WYSIWYG editors;
3. Almost trivial to kill markup.
Of course it would have to be part of something pm voiced before: a
second advanced *pioneering* strain of pmwiki.

This syntax does not compete with the pmwiki standard it is a different
beast. It shines when the going gets tough and nevertheless does not get in
the way of unitiated users. Most pages contain little markup anyway.

</propaganda>

Just another syntax...

-jm