[WMS] Re: Pre-cursor to wiki markup standard

  • From: Florian Festi <festifn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wiki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 18:20:00 +0200 (METDST)

Hi!

> But Andrew, I'd like to contradict you in one point. Not all terms that
> we use overlap. As I feel we need that distinction, I wish to point
> out, that "emphasis" and "italic" are two different things. Nowadays
> browsers present it the same - but only per default, and it makes a lot
> of sense to me to let users use <i> for italic text, but also provide a
> special CSS and markup rule for <em> (for example a slightly red color,
> instead of adding wiki markup for hundreds of colors - which not many
> people would use in the end).

> I make this distinction, because I see a big problem coming, with our
> vote on the "best" markup for 'italic'. (There is '' and // in use...)

I generally agree that we can discuss "emphasis" and "italic" as different 
things. But I disagree with your reason. You are trying to cheat. And this 
won't work.

"emphasis" and "italic" are not the same but they mean the same thing in 
the context of wiki. You invent a new "emphasis" that noone uses yet 
(I guess) and tell the users of one of the markup variants that they can 
keep their markup with a completely new meaning. If we can't agree on '' 
or // it would be more honest to say there are two allowed markups for the 
same thing than to create another artificial markup style we can't move 
from one wiki to another easily.

--
FlorianFesti
MoinMoin


Other related posts: