Gerard Meijssen wrote:
You underestimate the problems with readability you
get when your
proposal is set into motion. I do not think I will bother with editing
en:texts when I cannot easily read what it says. When people are
edititing a text, they have to read what it says. All this extra balast
will make it hard just to READ the article let alone edit it. So maybe
there are "plenty" people who get bothered when they read something they
are not familiar with but making it extra hard to editors will also make
for "plenty" people who resent this unreadable garble.
How exactly does putting curly brackets around a word make it any less
readable than square brackets as for links, or quote marks as for bold
and italic?
I'm sorry, but calling
The primary {{colors}}, according to ''The Big Book of Color'', are
[[red]], [[yellow]], and [[blue]].
"unreadable garble", but saying
The primary colors, according to ''The Big Book of Color'', are
[[red]], [[yellow]], and [[blue]].
is not "unreadable garble" is disingenuous.
An other thing
you miss is that with other ways of writing you get slightly different
meanings and your system CANNOT cater for that.
Neither does your system, which I presume is doing nothing. I'm not
claiming my proposal is a cure-all for problems regarding
understandability. It is, however, a way to increase understandability
and also increase consistency. Doing nothing, of course, does nothing to
increase understandability or consistency.
- David