ReST and YAML share the same deep flaw: both formats are marketed as simple, readable formats, and at a first glance, they look simple and read- able -- but in reality, they're messy as hell, and chances are that the thing you're looking at doesn't really mean what you think it means (unless you're the official ReST/YAML parser implementation). experienced designers know how to avoid that; the ReST/YAML designers don't even understand why they should.
I'm looking for a good textual markup language at the moment, for capturing web and similar textual content.
I don't want to use XML for this particular usage, because this content will be entered through a web interface, and I don't want to force users through multiple rounds of submit/check-syntax/generate-error-report/re-submit in order to enter their content.
I have no strong feelings about YAML: If I want to structured data, e.g. lists, dictionaries, etc, I just use python.
However, I'm torn on whether to use ReST for textual content. On the one hand, it's looks pretty comprehensive and solidly implemented. But OTOH, I'm concerned about complexity: I don't want to commit to ReST if it's going to become a lot of hard work or highly-inefficient when I really need to use it "in anger".
From what I've seen, pretty much every textual markup targetted for web content, e.g. wiki markup, seems to have grown/evolved organically, meaning that it is either underpowered or overpowered, full of special cases, doesn't have a meaningful object model, etc.
So, I'm hoping that the learned folks here might be able to give me some pointers to a markup language that has the following characteristics
1. Is straightforward for non-technical users to use, i.e. can be (mostly) explained in a two to three page document which is comprehensible to anyone who has ever used a simple word-processor or text-editor.
2. Allows a wide variety of content semantics to be represented, e.g. headings, footnotes, sub/superscript, links, etc, etc.
3. Has a complete (but preferably lightweight) object model into which documents can be loaded, for transformation to other languages.
4. Is speed and memory efficient.
5. Obviously, has a solid python implementation.
Most useful would be a pointer to a good comparison/review page which compares multiple markup languages, in terms of the above requirements.
If I can't find such a markup language, then I might instead end up using a WYSIWYG editing component that gives the user a GUI and generates (x)html.
htmlArea: http://www.htmlarea.com/ Editlet: http://www.editlet.com/
But I'd prefer a markup solution.
TIA for any pointers.
regards,
-- alan kennedy ------------------------------------------------------ email alan: http://xhaus.com/contact/alan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
