-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jeff Hammel skrev 08. juni 2009 14:46: > On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 02:36:49PM +0200, Eirik Schwenke wrote: >> Noah Kantrowitz skrev 04. juni 2009 22:13: >>> [ Note somehow icedove chokes on mutt's quoting, apologies if the indendation/quotemarkers are still wrong. Pretty sure this is a problem with icedove not mutt --- anyway:]
>> I'd be interested in hearing other points of view, especially >> against ReST, as I might be blind to any real deficiencies others >> find crippling ? >> > (this is all MHO, if that wasn't obvious). Indeed, I might have made that explicit for my thoughts as well --- All IMHO :-) >> > Its easier to write Trac wiki than ReST. I also find it more human > readable. As a big fan of markdown languages, I was very enamored > with ReST a few years ago. Now, I think its mostly awful, not that > there aren't things about Trac wiki that I would change. > Interesting, maybe I'm at the point you were a few years ago. One great advantage I failed to mention in favour of TracWikiMarkup, is ofcourse wiki links -- it's perhaps one of the biggest failings of ReST. On the other hand I've come to enjoy being able to have links/footnotes in one place in the text, and link to them like: [LinkToNamedFootnote]_. It does depend a bit on what one is writing. I often find myself moving text around, and parts of ReST syntax is better for that (section linking, footnotes/citations), and part of trac-syntax is better (better support for auto numbered lists). (...) > I've come to the conclusion than doing any sort of complicated > table with any markdown language is just horrible. The whole > reason to use a markdown language, vs WYSIWYG + HTML, is that it > should be easy to read as text and easy to write. I've seen tables > in both Trac wiki and ReST that are just boggling. Indeed. While I have little love for text editors, there's a definitive need for rich content, that can accompany (hyper)text. I feel csv-tables is a possible compromise -- but any table beyond the simplest ones needs a rich editor IMHO. (...) >> I do agree that it would be nice to use something standard-ish, >> which is a plus for ReST. That being said, I would miss Trac wiki >> syntax greatly. The other alternative is to spin off Trac wiki >> (the markdown syntax, not the linking or macros or what not) into >> its own product. I'd probably use it. If other people would...I >> wouldn't want to guess. ReST has a long history and people are >> reluctant to change. One of the benefits I see with ReST is that it seems to be solid design, with great room to improve. It merges a lot of good ideas from Markdown/Structured Text/LaTeX with reasonable readability. I'd still like to see some example of ReST vs Trac that you feel illustrates the readability issues. We'll probably still view them differently though ;-) Best regards, - -- .---. Eirik Schwenke <eirik.schwe...@nsd.uib.no> ( NSD ) Harald Hårfagresgate 29 Rom 150 '---' N-5007 Bergen tlf: (555) 889 13 GPG-key at pgp.mit.edu Id 0x8AA3392C -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkotDMUACgkQxUW7FIqjOSzS9gCgjn8V5KUGKLQDC0NM/6LCqH4y dvEAnRG+4Rgdn+qJDaT6xl/uY98aHRws =VEJK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Users" group. To post to this group, send email to trac-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to trac-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
