This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Web Authoring Tools > March 2007 > Pretty Semantic Markup
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Pretty Semantic Markup
|
|
| L. Kliemann 2007-03-17, 7:30 pm |
| Greetings,
I have conceived and implemented a semantic markup language aiming at being
- comfortable to use,
- easy to learn,
- and having 'pretty' source code.
It is called "Pretty Semantic Markup". A tool for transforming this markup
into HTML (validating as XHTML 1.0 strict) is provided. Find the software,
documentation, and more information at:
http://plastictree.net/software/psm/
I am very much interested in comments on this. Especially, I would like to
get suggestions on how to improve the categories for inline markup.
Regards, Lasse
| |
| Jukka K. Korpela 2007-03-17, 7:30 pm |
| Scripsit L. Kliemann:
> It is called "Pretty Semantic Markup".
Why? It's not much more semantic than HTML. In some ways, less.
> A tool for transforming this
> markup into HTML (validating as XHTML 1.0 strict) is provided.
This seems to be about converting stuff like
=== foo ===
(with _significant_ leading space) into
<h3>foo</h3>
Though some people might be afraid of HTML tags as "programming", I don't
think your idea really achieves much.
Besides, transforming into XHTML (as opposite to HTML 4.01) is pointless.
Not really harmful if you play by Appendix C, but pointless.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
| |
| L. Kliemann 2007-03-17, 7:30 pm |
| * Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>:
> Scripsit L. Kliemann:
>
>
> Why? It's not much more semantic than HTML. In some ways, less.
There is no way (yet) to express <address>, <abbrev>, and <acronym>. Is that
what you mean?
>
> This seems to be about converting stuff like
> === foo ===
> (with _significant_ leading space) into
> <h3>foo</h3>
>
> Though some people might be afraid of HTML tags as "programming", I don't
> think your idea really achieves much.
Users without a technical background in fact are very often afraid of HTML
tags. My idea is an attempt to create a markup that appears less "technical"
by giving the markup a more appealing look. However, it is not all about
making something less "technical" (which I usually even do not support). It
is also about making the source code look more like a rendered document.
And it is about easier input. Writing HTML tags with a standard keyboard
layout is a nuisance. Using a different layout, e.g. my own one[1], it
becomes easier. It is, however, not easy to convince users to change their
keyboard layout (although I keep trying). Still, even with a suitable
keyboard layout, <h3> is much a more complex construction and thus more
complicated to type in than just hammering three consecutive = into the
machine. The difference is even more drastic with lists or with links. When I
would like to enter a link into my document, first thing in my mind is the
URL, and second thing is the link text. Or vice versa, it does not matter.
Because, with HTML, I have to write '<a href="' first, which has *nothing* to
do with the URL nor the link text. Then I am allowed to enter the URL, and
before I am allowed to enter the link text, I have to do some more formalism
(close the quotes and the tag).
About the leading space: I am still not 100% satisfied with that myself.
Maybe remove this feature completely? Users can allways use the disturbance
character (backslash) to remove the special meaning of markup constructs.
They would only have to pay more attention then not to accidentally trigger
certain effects. But with syntax highlighting, this should not be too
difficult.
Lasse
| |
| Jukka K. Korpela 2007-03-18, 7:25 pm |
| Scripsit L. Kliemann:
> * Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>:
>
> There is no way (yet) to express <address>, <abbrev>, and <acronym>.
> Is that what you mean?
I meant what I wrote. You haven't really added semantic markup, and you have
even taken away some of the semantic markup of HTML. I'm not interested in
making detailed comparisons, when this is the big picture.
> Users without a technical background in fact are very often afraid of
> HTML tags.
And your private inventions like " ===" for a start tag and "===" for an end
tag are better exactly how?
> My idea is an attempt to create a markup that appears less
> "technical" by giving the markup a more appealing look.
Well, it failed.
Besides, since your private markup would have to be converted to some
variant of HTML to be of any use, authors using it would still have to face
the fact that what ultimately matters is the HTML markup. If they managed to
avoid learning HTML, they would have no way of solving problems of
rendering, or writing style sheets.
> However, it
> is not all about making something less "technical" (which I usually
> even do not support).
Sounds confused. You want it to look less technical but not be less
technical?
> It is also about making the source code look
> more like a rendered document.
It doesn't.
> And it is about easier input. Writing HTML tags with a standard
> keyboard layout is a nuisance.
You can't be serious. Or can you? (That was a rhetoric question.=
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|