One consequence of Markdown and other markups is its kinda, inadvertently, supporting an incorrect idea about writing and the nature of most documents.
The point is that most of them *assume that we need to ADD EXPLICIT MARKUP in order to render texts correctly*. The underlying idea is that "all documents are equally unstructured" so need markup help. That is COMPLETELY INCORRECT. Most documents folk write are within a TYPE that is already structured according to conventions. Parsers, given the correct document TYPE, can usually render a document correctly WITHOUT explicit markup. Markup ONLY being needed to force compliance when a section of text breaks the standard layout of the type. A very good example of this is screenplays. Their plain text typed layout already mostly determines how (IMPLICITLY) they should be "marked up" for render. The Fountain Syntax <https://fountain.io/syntax> for marking up screenplays is perhaps the best public example of a brilliant "Minimalist Markup"--mostly you need to add nothing explicit because the work is done simply by analysing the layout of the document. Other examples would be most novels, much poetry and sophisticated legal documents. These kinds of cases we should be able to support directly in TW quite easily, I think. Thoughts Josiah -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/152a0cfb-fe47-446a-9f60-87967007f64c%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
