Florian wrote: > ... > > The table is open for discussion and rewrite of course, I'm sure I > > forgot something important anyhow. > > Yes, some link types. Links to attachments (anyone else supporting this?) > and links to images and how to inline them/avoid to inline them. But I > don't know it we really need this right now. And I did not see "centered" > although we don't support it. Yep, centered is missing. I'll add it to the template then, though I don't believe we get any agreement on markup for aligning text. Attachments are a wide-spread feature, but it's a bit too extravagant as well to go into a general standard. Because it often looks that way, it could however get mentioned it in the section about InterWiki stuff. And ok, I shame for having completely forgotten image links... ;) > Could you explain what "Character Replacement" is, please? We have an > feature that might be meant with that it repalces some term at edit time - > things like @SIG@, @TIME@, @PAGE@ - but I am quite unshure about this... I've taken most terms from the MB:WikiMarkupStandard page, and "Character Replacement" there means "<" is replaced by "<" and "--" by — and such things. Your @SYMBOLS@ (even if it sounds more like a macro) would go into the same category IMO, simply mention it. This also can't be standardized seriously - the table is just a bit verbose at the wrong places :) Regards, mario