Rendering of italics - Wikitech-l - lists.wikimedia.org

List overview All Threads
Download

Rendering of italics

Open bug count: 346

Remove Wikicode

Lee Daniel Crocker

23 Apr 2005 23 Apr '05

6:08 a.m.

One thing I noticed after resurrecting the test suite: text in double tics is now rendered as "<i>" instead of "<em>". Was this a consciously-made change, or just an error introduced into the parser at some point? -- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/> <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/>

Reply

Show replies by date

Karl Eichwalder

23 Apr 23 Apr

2:49 p.m.

Lee Daniel Crocker <lee(a)piclab.com> writes:

One thing I noticed after resurrecting the test suite: text in double tics is now rendered as "<i>" instead of "<em>". Was this a consciously-made change, or just an error introduced into the parser at some point?

Because the WP markup is layout markup, using <i> is perfectly okay, unfortunately... Because we editors are stupid, we do not deserve semantic markup - that's what I was told more than once by the developers. -- http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) Key fingerprint = F138 B28F B7ED E0AC 1AB4 AA7F C90A 35C3 E9D0 5D1C

Reply

Tomer Chachamu

5:10 p.m.

On 23/04/05, Karl Eichwalder <ke(a)gnu.franken.de> wrote:

Because the WP markup is layout markup, using <i> is perfectly okay, unfortunately... Because we editors are stupid, we do not deserve semantic markup - that's what I was told more than once by the developers.

That's pathetic. We want semantic markup! We want semantic markup!

Reply

Delirium

11:53 p.m.

Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:

One thing I noticed after resurrecting the test suite: text in double tics is now rendered as "<i>" instead of "<em>". Was this a consciously-made change, or just an error introduced into the parser at some point?

It wouldn't be particularly correct to render it semantically as "emphasis", because the double-tics just mean "italicize this text". Sometimes that's used for emphasis (in which case <em> would be correct), sometimes to italicize book titles (in which case <cite> would be correct), and sometimes to italicize variables (in which case <var> would be correct). Unless we want to introduce three separate forms of wikimarkup for these three cases, <i> is at least less wrong than the other options... -Mark

Reply

Karl Eichwalder

24 Apr 24 Apr

6:14 a.m.

Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> writes:

Unless we want to introduce three separate forms of wikimarkup for these three cases, <i> is at least less wrong than the other options...

It's time to get rid of the wiki-markup - let's go for XML driven by a nice schema (DTD or RNG). The wiki-markup as used in the WP has changed to an expert system ("Geheimwissenschaft"). It is short, but cryptic. It is ambiguous and make it difficult to develop a consistent look and feel. Without semantic markup articles are just TLOBs (text large objects). Advanced querying is hardly possible. With proper markup you can access the "history" of all cities easily. If we do not switch now, our developers will re-invent XML and related technologies step-by-step. -- http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) Key fingerprint = F138 B28F B7ED E0AC 1AB4 AA7F C90A 35C3 E9D0 5D1C

Reply

6957

days inactive

6958

days old

wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

4 comments

4 participants

tags (0)

participants (4)

Delirium
Karl Eichwalder
Lee Daniel Crocker
Tomer Chachamu