2010/8/13 William Le Ferrand <william(a)corefarm.com>om>:
1) No, I haven't check that. It is a very
important issue, but if the
current result is not correct it should be a matter of fixing a few
bugs here and there, not a global design issue.
There is a very fundamental issue with converting wikitext to HTML,
then back, which is that there are multiple wikitext alternatives that
produce the same HTML: [[Foo]] and [[Foo|Foo]] for instance. Earlier
versions of FCKeditor used to 'normalize' all links looking like
[[Foo]] to [[Foo|Foo]], which resulted absolutely hideous diffs that
were nigh impossible to review because the actual changes got buried
in lots of link 'normalizations'. This is what Trevor is talking about
when he asks about the "cleanliness of your diffs".
I believe this particular bug was fixed, but the general point stands:
you need to somehow remember things about the wikitext that went in in
order to have a chance to get it back relatively unscathed. I
personally believe that the round-trip approach is fundamentally
flawed and that you should have some internal representation (not
HTML) closely connected to the wikitext in which you track changes,
but that's just my personal conviction and I'm not aware of any
successful editors built this way.
Roan Kattouw (Catrope)