PMario wrote:

> With TW we already have some severe and hard to fix problems, because the 
> existing parser is a bit sloppy at creating HTML code. Not to say it 
> ignores most of the rules. 
>
> This isn't a big problem if the content and the created HTML output stays 
> within TW. _But_ it is a problem if the content should be re-used as an 
> input for an other system that runs an HTML validator as the first step. 
> ... Such systems can be found in enterprise environments or if a user needs 
> to have "semantic" HTML code. 
>

I always appreciate  you contextualising TW in a bigger picture! It 
actually is very helpful.

We want TW to spread. So we should make our output more compliant 
> <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/pull/4195> and not less. 
>

I like idea of compliance as a key goal. 
On the other hand, TW, as a self-contained App., I'm not convinced "drift" 
from standards is always bad so long as the thing functions for purpose.

TT: FYI, I have myself used BJ's plugins that can create new CTs, or 
> support hybrid ones, where you can run a "pre-parser" before the standard 
> parsers kick in. It works well for my needs (screenplays).
>

There is some discussion going on, how to use different TW type field 
> settings. ... But imo that's more of a 5.2.x topic. 


*But will I be dead before 5.2? *That is a question :-). One has to get on 
and do stuff already too!

Just a footnote
TT

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/998bd5e7-afaf-4d36-97c3-7da9b30ff192%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to