[pmwiki-users] Planning for 2.2.0

Marc Cooper gmane at auxbuss.com
Sun Sep 24 10:17:49 CDT 2006

Patrick R. Michaud said...
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 01:20:13PM +0100, Marc Cooper wrote:
> > Joachim Durchholz said...
> > > Marc Cooper schrieb:
> > > > I'd not heard of this, but its advocation of markup treating a line 
> > > > break as a line break is enough to having me running a mile from it.
> > > 
> > > Actually I found that attractive.
> > 
> > [...]
> > I'd go as far as to say that the folk who advocated a "standard" syntax 
> > for a text markup that includes this rule do not understand the most 
> > basic aspects of the writing process - it's that bad a decision.
> I think I should interject at this point that the handling of linebreaks
> was one of the most contentious issues in PmWiki's early history.
> It turns out there's almost a perfect 50-50 split on the issue of
> making linebreaks fold text or produce line breaks.

Damn! I wasn't around here then.
> As such, there's no obviously "right" or "wrong" answer -- as with
> many things it depends on the types of authoring being performed.
> Either approach makes sense.
> PmWiki resolves this problem by supporting *both* approaches 
> through the (:linebreaks:) and (:nolinebreaks:) markups.

Oh yus, but I maintain that where typesetting is involved - which I 
regard wiki markup as being - then folding is a requisite. I understand 
that the some WYSINWYG folk might not grasp the concept,  but to abandon 
it through lack of knowledge is surely not the right thing to do.

Nevertheless, I maintain the Creole "spec" is fatally flawed, because of 
this decision. I, and many others, simply couldn't use it.


More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list