[Brion Vibber wrote] : Just thinking aloud, but could this be made equivalent to: ============================== '''First paragraph Second paragraph ============================== ... which currently produces HTML-compliant output? [Adrian Buehlmann wrote] : Yes, it is slightly unfortunate that "|" has been overloaded to mean both a parameter and to perform table-related functions. Of course with 20/20 hindsight, it's easy to say it could be useful to have two different constructs for these purposes. I suppose it's theoretically possible to introduce a new construct of some type (example: "%") to indicate parameters (since I suspect parameter delimiters are probably used less than "|" in tables), and have an overlap period when both the new and the old construct work to allow transitioning, and to then turn off/deprecate "|" for parameters. Then the old HTML "<table>" syntax could be dropped if there was general support for it (bias disclaimer: I personally prefer the wiki-table-syntax to the HTML-table-syntax), because "|" would no longer interfere with templates or ParserFunctions. In such a scenario, the question main though is whether $gain >= $pain. The pros and cons are probably something like this: $gain: * For people who prefer wiki tables to HTML tables. * Gain in standardization (only one table format to understand, rather than two). * Gain in simplifying the Parser slightly by eliminating HTML table syntax and "|" ambiguity (maybe?) * Gain for people who want to use table-related syntax as parameters to templates or ParserFunctions. $pain: * Transition costs in moving pages using old parameter syntax to new parameter syntax. * Transition costs in moving some pages from old HTML table syntax to wiki table syntax. * The Parser implementation pain. * Adjustment pain for people who prefer HTML table syntax. All the best, Nick.