On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 09:14:06AM -0000, Phil Boswell wrote:
"Magnus Manske" magnus.manske@web.de wrote in message news:43A701CC.2020809@web.de...
Uwe Brauer wrote:
Hello
Some articles bear the label: this page needs to be wikified, also it looks not much different to a standard wikipedia page. My question is which html constructions are considered as evil?
All of them, according to wikimarkup purists.
...which is really annoying when the perfectly legal (and thoroughly documented) <blockquote> makes much more sense than a simple ":" indentation. Maybe we should make it a requirement that you read the Help page on legitimate markup before you're allowed to summarily revert formatting :-)
Maybe...I should put it into a template [runs and hides behing Magnus ;-]
When I consider what can be taken as legal wiki markup (when, say, writing a "third-party" wikicruncher), I have a general rule of thumb that everything per XHTML DTD inside <body>...</body> except <style>, <script> and maybe <object> must be parsed properly and considered legal; plus all those nice and not so nice quirks carefully piled onto each other by wikimedians for years.
When I write my own wiki pages (not on wikipedia), I generate wiki markup wherever possible, except that '' and ''' irritate me, as well as having no wiki way to do multi-paragraph list items.