[wiki-standards] Re: wiki-standards Digest, Vol 22, Issue 9

[Mike Haseler]

> 
> Our plan was that Creole Additions would be used for things such as
> text color that not every wiki needs, but some wikis want.  The idea
> was that we would first standardize the elements that everyone needs
> and then the optional elements we would put in Additions.  Does this
> address that issue?
> 
> We really did work hard to make this spec, and yes I'll admit it's
> quite lax, but we're open to criticism.  :)  I'm thinking we should
> mention Dirk's grammar on WikiCreole.org more prominently.
> 
> Peace,
> Chuck
> 
Chuck,

I've no doubt you worked hard on the spec. I think what really made me 
angry was the thought of all this effort - and badly needed effort - 
going to waste through lack of ambition.

 > was that we would first standardize the elements that everyone needs

As a user, I'm beginning to realise that what I need the standard to say 
is WHAT IS NOT GOING TO PRODUCE MARKUP. As a user, I'm prepared to find 
out how to do things, but it really pisses me off to find things that I 
think should be interpreted as text being interpreted as markup when:

1. I often don't know the application being used on the site
2. Even if I knew the application, I probably don't know the markup it uses
3. Even if I had experience of the application and markup, the huge 
variety of markup and uses means I forget what does what on what site.

I really need to have some simple rules to be able to predict which 
character combinations **WILL NOT BE INTERPRETED AS FORMATTING**

Every time some brightspark invents another sequence of characters, it 
is another potential pitfall for anyone who is brave enough to post on 
unknown sites.

That is what I think was forgotten when Creole set as its goal being 
"collision free" and "optional" or whatever it says.

By saying you aren't going to have character sequences that are already 
used elsewhere, you are effectively increasing the number of character 
combinations that a user on a random wiki needs to avoid to prevent 
inadvertent markup - you are making the task of wiki entry MORE 
DIFFICULT NOT LESS.

By saying Creole markup is arbitrarily extendible with random sequences 
of new characters depending on the whim of the code writer, you are in 
effect telling the user they can never be sure how to avoid markup.
__EVEN ON A SITE THAT SAYS IT USES CREOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!__

So, let me propose as the prime user-centric goals which I think are key 
to a successful wiki markup spec:-

1. Creole will make maximal reuse of currently used markup characters 
and sequences (not necessarily for the same formatting)

2. Creole will define all potential character code sequences even when 
many may not be implemented in the current (or any) specification.

The problem Creole faces is that:

Goal (1) is totally undermined by the Creole's current attempt to be 
collision free.

Goal (2) is totally undermined by this idea of creating a core set of 
markup and leaving it up to the developer to arbitrarily define whatever 
extension code they like.

Mike