Wouter wrote regarding 'RE: [OT] what about "wiki"' on Wed, Jan 25 at 15:47:
> I wasn't asking for the exact instructions how to avoid this. I was only
> pointing out that for every transformation a 'real' user will have to
> learn it all.

And the point of the directions was that, in the common case of a
single pipe in a line preceded only by whitespace, there is nothing to
learn.  It just works.  As with most common-case situations in a
well-desinged markup language, things just work.

> > Yeah, it's
> > HTML-ish, but one tag's easier to remember 
> 
> no, because I already know them

So it's "as easy" rather than "easier" in many cases, and only one
click away in the others.

> > (and document)
> 
> no, beacuse that has already been done

What I meant by ease of documetation was that a well-designed
casual-use markup language can be thoroughly documented in a single
page which someone unfamiliar with the markup could read and start
using in a matter of minutes.  HTML, simple as it may be, is not that
markup.  It takes weeks to master just the basics, esp. if someone's
working with it less than often.  I've helped teach HTML to smart
people who are non-programmers before, and it's always the same
reaction - "this is hard to remember".  The difference between tags
and attributes seems to be a big stumbling block for many.

Regardless, the discussion I'm having is whether it's worthwhile to
develop a new markup language for a general-purpose community-edited
site.  There are a few edge cases where everyone in a given community
knows HTML, but in most comunities that's not the case.  Even here,
where everyone has some level of technical aptitude, I'll bet there is
a large segment of the readership that does not already have mastery
of HTML.  Heck, someone used a font tag on piclist.com, when the font
tag has been deprecated for at leat two *major* revisions of HTML and
several years - they should have used a span with a style attribute.

So, in light of the observations that *most* communities do not have
universal HTML fluency, why not come up with a simpler markup that's
easy to learn for everyone?  Because of the one or two obstinate
people who insist that their brain is far too valuable to polute with
another markup syntax?  There are two solutions there.  One is
implemented by twiki, at least, and probably others - allow both,
providing an option to those who aren't already a member of the html
illuminati without limiting the few who can't change their ways.  The
other is to say "screw you, too", since that kind of person generally
won't be happy with any solution, and will just complain about
something else.  Best to get rid of them from the beginning. :)

Or I suppose there's a third option - just use HTML, and get a big
friggin mess created because half of the people who think they know
HTML really don't know jack about how to create clean, editable HTML
that someone else can contribute to later, and the other half will
make things so complex that the first half will just break it when
they attempt a contribution.  Unless the content's so simple that it
never mattered in the first place...

> You still don't get it. If someone in the chain knew how to do it
> properly he would be forbidden from doing so, so he would soon leave in
> frustration.

This is a university, isn't it? ;)

> Somewhat related: we want to make an 'exhibition' website part with
> students projects. Thinks like H-bridge designs, processor/video-gen in
> VHDL, etc. But for some stupid reason (that no-one realy seems to know!)
> we can't do that in any official way.

"Students".  Yup, definitely an educational institution of some sort.
You're right - I got out of working in IT (non-student) at an academic
institution as soon as I could.  Man, academic beurocracy gets in the
way of *everything*.

--Danny
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist