On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:29:13 +0100
Thorsten Jolitz <tjol...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi List,
>
> when writing the picolisp-wiki-mode for Emacs, I began to understand
> why mark-up syntax is usually symmetric, i.e. the end-tag looks like a
> 180° mapping of the start-tag (e.g. the JSP Scriplet <% ... %>).
>
> This makes parsing the file and constructing regexp much easier,
> because its always clear which end-tag belongs to which start-tag.
>
> The PicoLisp Wiki Syntax does not follow this convention:
>
> ,-------------------------------------------------------------------
> | 3{Heading} Heading (level 3)
> | Levels 1 .. 6 are allowed
> |
> | &{3} Insert 3 line breaks
> | &{-3} Insert 3 line breaks, clear float
> style |
> | /{italic} Italic font
> | !{bold} Bold font
> | _{underline} Underlined font [...]
> `-------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Considering the possible nesting of elements (e.g. a bold word inside
> a link inside a list item), it becomes very difficult to construct
> regexp that reliably identify elements (necesary for fontification)
> because there are so many closing braces '}' around (and there might
> even be closing braces in the text itself).
>
> What about changing the syntax to this:
>
> ,-------------------------------------------------------------------
> | 3{Heading}3 Heading (level 3)
> | Levels 1 .. 6 are allowed
> |
> | &{3}& Insert 3 line breaks
> | &{-3}& Insert 3 line breaks, clear float
> style |
> | /{italic}/ Italic font
> | !{bold}! Bold font
> | _{underline}_ Underlined font [...]
> `-------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I know, its one more char to type (not when you use the
> picolisp-wiki-mode for Emacs) and looks ugly, but would make things a
> bit more 'standard' and easier to deal with. Its not really a big
> issue, since the picolisp-wiki-mode works fine even if fontification
> is a bit random. Don't know if it would be an improvement and worth
> the pain.
>
It's not an improvement, and not worth it, imo. The current wiki syntax
is pretty much a lightweight variant of TeX, Emacs can fontify TeX just
fine, so the issue is in the emacs mode, not the syntax.
-Jose
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
