---- Original Message -----
From: "David Gerard"
<dgerard(a)gmail.com>
On 6 February 2012 21:02, Jay Ashworth
<jra(a)baylink.com> wrote:
Correct, and it isn't merely investments in
learning; there are likely
investments in wrap-around-the-outside coding which assume access to markup
as well. Not All Mediawikiae Are Wikipedia.
Your use of "likely" there turns out to be largely incorrect - one of
the biggest problems with wikitext is that it's all but unparsable by
machines other than the original parser routines in MediaWiki. That
fact was one of the inspirations for this list existing at all: to
come up with a definition of wikitext that could be used by machine
parsers at all.
I was around when wikitext-l forked; I know pretty much exactly how
unparseable MWtext is. That doesn't preclude external code which
*generates* MWtext for injection into wikis.
And in fact, IIRC, there are 4 or 5 parser replacements that are
between 97 and 99% accurate. Not good enough for Wikipedia, but
they'd certainly be good enough for nearly anything else...
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra(a)baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates
http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA
http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274