[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Dr. Dobb's dumps on RedCloth

Bil Kleb

8/29/2006 2:20:00 AM

As part of their "best Ajax" article:

http://www.ddj.com/dept/architect/192203...

Welcome to the 1980s. Want to make text bold? You'll
have to put the characters * and * around it. For big
text, first type in h1. All that's missing is a DOS
prompt and a floppy disk. No thanks -- been there,
done that.

Later,
--
Bil Kleb
http://fun3d.lar...
34 Answers

James Britt

8/29/2006 3:09:00 AM

0

Bil Kleb wrote:
> As part of their "best Ajax" article:
>
> http://www.ddj.com/dept/architect/192203...
>
> Welcome to the 1980s. Want to make text bold? You'll
> have to put the characters * and * around it. For big
> text, first type in h1. All that's missing is a DOS
> prompt and a floppy disk. No thanks -- been there,
> done that.

The browser address bar is the DOS prompt. Welcome the the 21st C.
Besides, WYSIWYG is so '90s.

I much prefer Writely to Writeboard, but this reviewer so misses the
point it's laughable.

(I think the last good issue of Dr. Dobbs was the 30th anniversary one.)


--
James Britt

"Judge a man by his questions, rather than his answers."
- Voltaire

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

8/29/2006 3:41:00 AM

0

James Britt wrote:
> Bil Kleb wrote:
>> As part of their "best Ajax" article:
>>
>> http://www.ddj.com/dept/architect/192203...
>>
>> Welcome to the 1980s. Want to make text bold? You'll
>> have to put the characters * and * around it. For big
>> text, first type in h1. All that's missing is a DOS
>> prompt and a floppy disk. No thanks -- been there,
>> done that.
>
> The browser address bar is the DOS prompt. Welcome the the 21st C.
> Besides, WYSIWYG is so '90s.
>
> I much prefer Writely to Writeboard, but this reviewer so misses the
> point it's laughable.
>
> (I think the last good issue of Dr. Dobbs was the 30th anniversary one.)
>
>
Well now ... I agree with Dr. Dobbs in this case. Give me WYSIWYG or
give me HTML, but don't make me learn a *third* language to mark up text!

Philip Hallstrom

8/29/2006 4:09:00 AM

0

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

8/29/2006 4:16:00 AM

0

Philip Hallstrom wrote:
>>>> As part of their "best Ajax" article:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ddj.com/dept/architect/192203...
>>>>
>>>> Welcome to the 1980s. Want to make text bold? You'll
>>>> have to put the characters * and * around it. For big
>>>> text, first type in h1. All that's missing is a DOS
>>>> prompt and a floppy disk. No thanks -- been there,
>>>> done that.
>>>
>>> The browser address bar is the DOS prompt. Welcome the the 21st C.
>>> Besides, WYSIWYG is so '90s.
>>>
>>> I much prefer Writely to Writeboard, but this reviewer so misses the
>>> point it's laughable.
>>>
>>> (I think the last good issue of Dr. Dobbs was the 30th anniversary one.)
>>>
>>>
>> Well now ... I agree with Dr. Dobbs in this case. Give me WYSIWYG or
>> give me HTML, but don't make me learn a *third* language to mark up text!
>
> Didn't you mean to say "don't make me learn a <b>third</b> language to
> mark up text" ?
>
> :-)
>
> Sorry... I just couldn't help myself :-)
>
>
Uh ... yeah. Dang VT100 muscle memory. :)

Which reminds me ... I need to install a DOS emulator to run some Pascal
code.

Joe Ruby

8/29/2006 4:28:00 AM

0

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> James Britt wrote:
>>
>> The browser address bar is the DOS prompt. Welcome the the 21st C.
>> Besides, WYSIWYG is so '90s.
>>
>> I much prefer Writely to Writeboard, but this reviewer so misses the
>> point it's laughable.
>>
>> (I think the last good issue of Dr. Dobbs was the 30th anniversary one.)
>>
>>
> Well now ... I agree with Dr. Dobbs in this case. Give me WYSIWYG or
> give me HTML, but don't make me learn a *third* language to mark up
> text!

Bleh, give me something BETTER than HTML, which is RedCloth.

Joe

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

David Vallner

8/30/2006 2:00:00 AM

0

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
>>> Well now ... I agree with Dr. Dobbs in this case. Give me WYSIWYG or
>>> give me HTML, but don't make me learn a *third* language to mark up text!
>> Didn't you mean to say "don't make me learn a <b>third</b> language to
>> mark up text" ?
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Sorry... I just couldn't help myself :-)
>>
>>
> Uh ... yeah. Dang VT100 muscle memory. :)
>

PWNED! *cough*

Besides. On which language to program a computer are you now? Or did you
stop counting around twenty? Nothing wrong with an alternate approach if
it's better. And Textile sure is less (sometimes much less) of a
wristkiller than raw HTML. I wonder which smart mind came up with the
angle bracket idea, and all the slashes aren't nice on the pinkies either.

I sometimes prefer Markdown or Mediawiki syntax, since Textile headings
are ghastly. But Textile's quick CSS modifiers for margins and paragraph
indentation are very neat, and on the whole it's a bit richer.

But Dr. Dobbs' point -is- valid, exposing someone to that by default,
heck, without a WYSIWYG alternative is just vile - even if it's
technically a very good alternative to HTML, it's an annoying We Know
What's Good For You Better Than You Do attitude to your users /
customers. (Even if I resent the DOS prompt / floppy disk oh-so-witty
wisecrack - you're a journalist, just review the damn software without
having to invent smartass ways to emphasise its suckiness when you run
out of factual observations and leave the dry sarcasm to people that are
actually funny.)

David Vallner

James Britt

8/30/2006 2:23:00 AM

0

David Vallner wrote:


>
> But Dr. Dobbs' point -is- valid, exposing someone to that by default,
> heck, without a WYSIWYG alternative is just vile - even if it's
> technically a very good alternative to HTML, it's an annoying We Know
> What's Good For You Better Than You Do attitude to your users /
> customers.

It seems more like a "We're offering an option for people who prefer
Textile to WYSIWYG or hand-coded HTML, since no one is forced to use any
of these tools, and choice is good" attitude.

The reviewer missed this same point.

--
James Britt

"Blanket statements are over-rated"

David Vallner

8/30/2006 2:40:00 AM

0

James Britt wrote:
> David Vallner wrote:
>
>
>>
>> But Dr. Dobbs' point -is- valid, exposing someone to that by default,
>> heck, without a WYSIWYG alternative is just vile - even if it's
>> technically a very good alternative to HTML, it's an annoying We Know
>> What's Good For You Better Than You Do attitude to your users /
>> customers.
>
> It seems more like a "We're offering an option for people who prefer
> Textile to WYSIWYG or hand-coded HTML, since no one is forced to use any
> of these tools, and choice is good" attitude.
>
> The reviewer missed this same point.
>

Hmm. My phrasing of that was wrong. And probably what I was saying in
the first place too... Comparing a rather specialised text-sharing tool
to Word-inna-browser ones is indeed nonsense.

David Vallner

Bil Kleb

8/30/2006 11:33:00 AM

0

David Vallner wrote:
>
> I sometimes prefer Markdown or Mediawiki syntax, since Textile headings
> are ghastly. But Textile's quick CSS modifiers for margins and paragraph
> indentation are very neat, and on the whole it's a bit richer.

FYI, RedCloth 3.x does (some) Markdown too,

http://redhanded.hobix.com/inspect/usingRedc...

but it's only mentioned in the tag line of,

http://whytheluckystiff.net/ruby...

Regards,
--
Bil Kleb
http://fun3d.lar...

jmg3000

8/30/2006 2:37:00 PM

0

On 8/30/06, Bil Kleb <Bil.Kleb@nasa.gov> wrote:
> David Vallner wrote:
> >
> > I sometimes prefer Markdown or Mediawiki syntax, since Textile headings
> > are ghastly. But Textile's quick CSS modifiers for margins and paragraph
> > indentation are very neat, and on the whole it's a bit richer.
>
> FYI, RedCloth 3.x does (some) Markdown too,
>
> [snip]

I've tried RedCloth, but IIRC it wouldn't let me tell it only process
Markdown (and not Textile markup) so I switched to BlueCloth. I got
the impression that, with RedCloth, Markdown is a bit of a 2nd-class
citizen.

The BlueCloth source looks to be fairly straightforward (maybe a
fairly direct recoding of John Gruber's own Perl version?), is only
one source code file, and is pretty well-commented.

---John