Vincent Massol wrote:
> I've updated this page
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Drafts/XWikiSyntax20
> which describes both XWiki syntax 1.0 and XWiki Syntax 2.0.
>
> I want to make sure we agree with the following syntax decisions and
> especially with regards to Creole since we want to be close to it.
>
> One disclaimer though: the creole specification is badly done and is
> not strict enough. There are lots of ambiguities in their descriptions
> of the syntax elements so it's almost impossible to ensure to be fully
> compatible with some element syntaxes.
>
> 1) New lines
>
> Right now we honor new lines (we've all already voted to have this). I
> just wanted to point out that this is different from Creole.
>
> 2) Horizontal lines
>
> We accept 4 or more dashes. Creole says it's 4 dashes only. However if
> you try it on their test page at
http://www.wikicreole.org/EditX.jsp?page=JSPWikiTestCases
> if works fine with more than 4 dashes too.
>
> 3) Special numbered lists
>
> Is it ok to have this syntax:
>
> (% class="roman" %)
> 1. item1
> 1. item2
>
> Or do we introduce new syntax elements as it's done in XWiki Syntax
> 1.0:
>
> i. item1
> i. item2
>
> See
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Drafts/XWikiSyntax20#HLists
> for more examples.
>
> I have the feeling it would be better to use our 1.0 syntax for this
> (note that this requires some heavy changes to wikimodel - Will need
> to discuss it with Mikhail).
+1 to support both.
+0 to only 1. with (% %)
> 4) Images
>
> There's currently no special support for images in wikimodel. The
> solution wikimodel proposes is to implement its support through
> linline links. For example:
>
> This is an image:my.png image.
+1.
Even prefix is not good for I18N, I don't see other acceptable ways in
http://www.wikicreole.org/wiki/ImagesReasoning.
If we're ok to use the uri notationI'm
proposing to use the same
syntax we've started discussing for image links.
image:subwiki:Space.Page^imagename
Note that ^ is temporary since we haven't fully decided yet what
symbol to use. I'll reopen the discussion for that.
+1
--
Artem Melentyev