[pmwiki-users] how to use HTML5

[a.sonderhoff at gassi-tv.de]

Lars: I don’t think that Paul asked how to accomodate the needs of the editors of PmWiki’s original target audience, nor that he asked how to completely implement every aspect of HTML5 and YAML4 in PmWiki.

> I am reading a book on HTML5 and I am interested in creating a new skin , based on YAML 4 (See http://yaml.de) . As part of that, I would like to use HTML5 in the new skin. New tags likes <header>, <footer>, <nav> and so on is not difficult and can be easily embedded in the skin template, but is there any way to get PMwiki to use the <article> and <section> tags in generating page content instead of <p> ? How would I do that? 

Paul: In fact you can just go with your HTML5/YAML4 skin template and write some custom markup for <article> and <section> tags. The latter one might be a little more complicated, because you have to come up with a way on how to determine where <article/section> need to be closed again from within a regular expressions string. Are you familiar with defining custom markup in PmWiki?



On Jul/03, 2012, at 1504 , Lars Eighner wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Jul 2012, a.sonderhoff at gassi-tv.de wrote:
> 
>> As discussed earlier in this mailing list, PmWiki is not just targetting
>> the average wiki use, but is also considered to be a full-fledged CMS.  As
>> such Paul?s question is totally legit and the use of HTML5 especially
>> considering, that its support will be essential soon,
> 
> It is not clear to me in what sense HTML5 will be essential soon.
> 
>> makes sense to me.  I also don?t think, that user experience will be
>> complicated by the introduction of HTML5/YAML4 to PmWiki.  In the end the
>> introduction of additional markup is just another possibility for advanced
>> users to declare structure within the content.  If PmWiki would only
>> target naïve users, there would not be (:table :), (:if :) and other
>> directives.
> 
> As it is, the XHTML TABLE element is not fully supported now (or did I miss
> the markup for THEAD etc.?)  There is plenty of (X)HTML not represented in
> the PmWiki core such as CITE, ADDRESS, and so forth.
> 
>> However, I agree with Lars, that implementing certain structural markup
>> will be more than just a little tweak.  That said, I never experienced any
>> problems generating HTML5 code with PmWiki, that do not use the new
>> structural tags (or YAML4 for that matter), by simply creating an HTML5
>> template.
> 
> It is hard to imagine any potential new flavors of HTML that would not be
> backward compatible with the core PmWiki markup.  However, it is also hard
> to imagine that PmWiki could entirely accommodate everything in any HTML
> flavor.
> 
> For example, HTML5 brings back a redefined I element. HTML5 I is probably
> more like what most users mean when they use wiki '', which is now
> translated EM.  What should be done?  Quietly change the PmWiki translation
> of '' to I, on the grounds that the new, improved I will most be compatible
> with what most users of existing wikis meant most of the time?  Insist ''
> means EM and find a new wikism for I?  Ignore the new, improved I
> altogether? Rip everything out to the walls, recast all the markup,
> abandoning existing installations?
> 
> Of course, most users, most of the time will be happy so long as '' comes
> out in an italic font because wikis are pretty much come down on the
> presentational side.
> 
> Everything except ignoring most of HTML5 would not require a lot of work but
> would also require a lot of soul-searching questions about what a wiki is,
> and so forth.  I don't think I am putting words in the author's mouth to say
> the PmWiki philosophy is very minimalist -- putting just essential stuff in
> the core, enough to get a wiki up, and leaving the rest for user extensions
> via the Cookbook.  That's why there is really no problem with declaring your
> documents HTML5 and making suitable adjustments in the template.
> 
> Then it is up to you how far you want to go in HTML5esque extentions.  You
> probably do want VIDEO.  If I is a better translation of what you want '' to
> mean than EM, that is simple enough.  Maybe you do not really need a markup
> for EM then because you never really mean EM when you use ''.
> 
> But the SECTION and ARTICLE elements within the body of an entry are not
> really very useful by themselves, and I think there is a good case to be
> made that in a wiki there will never be enough call for them to make the
> effort of an extension worthwhile.  Do you really want to write a book on
> one wiki page?  Or would the wiki way be to Group a book or a journal?
> 
> -- 
> Lars Eighner
> http://www.larseighner.com/index.html
> 8800 N IH35 APT 1191 AUSTIN TX 78753-5266