On 02/08/2012 04:06 PM, Oren Bochman wrote:
I'm all for a modern WYSIWYG editor however it would still require an underlying syntax.
I disagree that that xhtml is a geek only storage format or that the current Wikisyntax has a lower learning curve. Hacking templates to overcome parser bugs is one of the worst experiences I've has as an editor.
I think that an xml subset is the ideal should be the underlying format. It's the best known technology, has mature development tools. It could be parsed to and written to most efficiently by browser, and even the editor could be simplified by using it.
This is actually what we are doing, so I take that as an encouragement ;)
We are building an HTML5 DOM, and plan to represent higher-level functionality as microdata. We discussed this last week on this list in the following thread:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.wikitext/512
More information about the parser and DOM can be found at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Future/Parser_development.
Also note that the HTML5 DOM can be serialized to XML. Links to relevant docs can be found in the notes section of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Future/HTML5_DOM_with_microdata.
Cheers,
Gabriel