On 02/08/2012 04:06 PM, Oren Bochman wrote: > I'm all for a modern WYSIWYG editor however it would still require an > underlying syntax. > > I disagree that that xhtml is a geek only storage format or that the current > Wikisyntax has a lower learning curve. > Hacking templates to overcome parser bugs is one of the worst experiences > I've has as an editor. > > I think that an xml subset is the ideal should be the underlying format. It's > the best known technology, has mature development tools. > It could be parsed to and written to most efficiently by browser, and even > the editor could be simplified by using it.
This is actually what we are doing, so I take that as an encouragement ;) We are building an HTML5 DOM, and plan to represent higher-level functionality as microdata. We discussed this last week on this list in the following thread: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.wikitext/512 More information about the parser and DOM can be found at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Future/Parser_development. Also note that the HTML5 DOM can be serialized to XML. Links to relevant docs can be found in the notes section of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Future/HTML5_DOM_with_microdata. Cheers, Gabriel _______________________________________________ Wikitext-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitext-l
