> I don't understand. What about the
> = Header 1 =,
> == Header 2 ==, and
> === Header 3 === etc.
> markup
er. and H4 - H8? I can see why you want it. It's very idiosyncratic,
nevertheless. HTML is //much// simpler. And the stuff you learn is
//portable//. The way the wikis are going, you're going to need to know a
raft of different flavours of markup.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan.Hidders" <hidders(a)uia.ua.ac.be>
To: <wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Parsing
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 10:52:32AM -0400, The
Cunctator wrote:
> On 7/30/02 8:37 AM, "Steve Callaway" <sjc(a)easynet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Tarquin,
> >
> > I (and probably most people I know (yeah, I live a sad life among the
SGML,
> > XML and HTML communities)) would disagree
strongly with Wiki markup on
a
> > number of grounds. Firstly it's quirky
and non-standard. The whole
point of
> > the standard mark-up languages is that
they're not difficult to learn
and
> > carry both visual and informational order.
H1, H2, H3 cannot be
replicated
> > by wiki markup in any sense. We are also
really going to need these
once we
get to really large articles which require structure
to the substance.
I don't understand. What about the
= Header 1 =,
== Header 2 ==, and
=== Header 3 === etc.
markup?
Indeed. So these guys have learned SGML, HTML1, 2, 3 and 4, and probably
type it by hand for a living, but learning the Wiki mark-up, wow, that is
asking just too much. :-)
-- Jan Hidders
[Wikipedia-l]
To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l