[Note: I've crossposted to the main list so that people can see
that there's a proposal to recognise "=".]
Brion Vibber wrote:
>Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>>Paul Ebermann wrote:
>>>Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>>>>"=" worked in UseMod and must be kept supported.
Ah, I understand what the issue is now.
You're using "=" *already* there!
>>>>And no arguing is permitted (unless it comes from Polish
>>>>Wikipedians). Markup must not break.
Of course everybody has the opportunity to argue --
unless you're suggesting a fork in the wiki markup, that is.
>>>I think with an automatic conversion this would
>>>not be an important problem.
That would solve it once, if nobody's in the habit of using "=".
>>This would be a problem as people got used to that notation.
So the question is, are they used to it now?
I would assume yes, meaning that "=" should be supported.
>As far as I know it was only ever removed by oversight. I have no
>objection to putting it back, and will do so if no one else either does
>it first or gives a very convincing reason otherwise.
My concern is that a line bounded by "=" could show up naturally
in a context of writing out a mathematical equation.
It could easily be avoided by changing the line breaking, however.
So I'd appreciate it if somebody would verify (by SQL) that
no such pattern exists in the nonUseMod wikis now;
in the future, the "Preview" button will catch it.
>HTML headers do not impose any kind of hierarchical structure. (If they
>did, you'd have to put all following text and subheadings _inside_ the
>open/close tag pair, probably looking something like the list tags.) Our
>==headers== are simple aliases to the HTML headers, and should not be
>burdened by overcomplex hierarchy rules, magical collapsing tables of
>contents (if you need a table of contents, your article is too long), or
>magical detectors that chew out the user for not insufficiently
>(s)lavishly constructing their markup.
Actually, our headers *do* already impose a heirarchical structure.
Turn on numbered headers in your user preferences to see it.
This is a very desirable option IMO. No arguing is permitted
unless it comes from people with that preference set ^_^.
-- Toby