On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:16:00 -0700, gcomnz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >By the way, I think I've seen a few people suggest some sort of >syntax-switching mechanism for "Pod6". The day people have to think >about what dialect of Pod they're using is the day Pod dies as a >useful documentation language. 1. TMTOWTDI 2. Competition will help, not hinder. I for one would very much like to see a more Wiki and less POD like syntax. But that's a matter of taste. I will say though that I've never heard of anyone suffering because of how wide or narrow the [ and ] characters are in Wiki markup ;-). And MediaWiki's format is a beautiful example of a markup that has taken off and vastly simplified page creation and editing for over 100,000 editors at Wikipedia. 3. A format like I<text> or C<text> is just plain ugly and verbose. I can't imagine why anyone defends that as something too keep. In understand there's a lot of love/hate emotion when it comes to Wiki's, but if we step back and ignore for a moment what the alternatives are will we really still want to keep that ugly inline syntax? (No disrespect intended, POD clearly predates of lot of other ideas about simple markups.) Marcus
