Gerard Meijssen wrote:
You underestimate the problems with readability you get when your proposal is set into motion. I do not think I will bother with editing en:texts when I cannot easily read what it says. When people are edititing a text, they have to read what it says. All this extra balast will make it hard just to READ the article let alone edit it. So maybe there are "plenty" people who get bothered when they read something they are not familiar with but making it extra hard to editors will also make for "plenty" people who resent this unreadable garble.
How exactly does putting curly brackets around a word make it any less readable than square brackets as for links, or quote marks as for bold and italic?
I'm sorry, but calling
The primary {{colors}}, according to ''The Big Book of Color'', are [[red]], [[yellow]], and [[blue]].
"unreadable garble", but saying
The primary colors, according to ''The Big Book of Color'', are [[red]], [[yellow]], and [[blue]].
is not "unreadable garble" is disingenuous.
An other thing you miss is that with other ways of writing you get slightly different meanings and your system CANNOT cater for that.
Neither does your system, which I presume is doing nothing. I'm not claiming my proposal is a cure-all for problems regarding understandability. It is, however, a way to increase understandability and also increase consistency. Doing nothing, of course, does nothing to increase understandability or consistency.
- David