Steve Bennett wrote:
This text:
- foo
#*#*#*#*#***#*###*# bloo
- foo
may be odd, but it's valid and can be rendered.
But maybe a parser (EBNF or not) should warn against "odd" things rather than just categorizing wikitext as being valid/invalid. How odd is this syntax (47 points on the "odd" scale) and how many places in language X of Wikipedia have this level of oddness? Perhaps they should be replaced with something less odd?
It's easy enough to say "we should write a parser", but when you want to achieve a certain goal (e.g. suggest replacement wikitext that is more user/editor friendly), the problem becomes a lot more interesting.