Talk:Markup

From Just Solve the File Format Problem
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "Similar to what I said about Binary Data, I think that Markup should rarely if ever be a format's primary category. A format should be categorized based o...")
 
 
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown)
Line 29: Line 29:
  
 
[[User:Jsummers|Jsummers]] ([[User talk:Jsummers|talk]]) 15:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 
[[User:Jsummers|Jsummers]] ([[User talk:Jsummers|talk]]) 15:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 +
 +
:That probably makes sense, though as you note some of them get a bit questionable to categorize... that was the appeal of vague categories like "Markup". [[User:Dan Tobias|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias|talk]]) 20:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 +
 +
::On reconsideration, I think that leaving the general markup formats (SGML, XML) and the plaintext/richtext hybrid formats (Markdown, etc.) in Markup is as good as anything else. I still want to move HTML and friends, and probably TeX and others. [[User:Jsummers|Jsummers]] ([[User talk:Jsummers|talk]]) 14:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:59, 10 April 2016

Similar to what I said about Binary Data, I think that Markup should rarely if ever be a format's primary category. A format should be categorized based on its purpose, not its low level structure.

A lot of our Markup formats involve hypertext. The distinction between hypertext, hypermedia, and a lot of modern Document formats is blurry. For convenience, I lean toward lumping hypertext and hypermedia together, in a section named either "Hypermedia" or "Hypertext and Hypermedia". Even then, I'm not sure if a format like Markdown would be Hypermedia, or Document.

This proposed list of primary category changes includes all articles whose primary category is Markup.

  • Accelerated Mobile Pages: Web → Hypermedia
  • AIML: Markup → Scientific Data formats?
  • Binary XML: Markup → Metaformats
  • CommonMark: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
  • Compressed Markup Language: Web → Hypermedia
  • DTD: Markup → Metaformats
  • Fountain: Markup → Document
  • HTML: Markup → Hypermedia
  • LaTeX: Markup → Document
  • Markdeep: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
  • Markdown: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
  • MHTML: Web → Hypermedia
  • OBML (Opera Binary Markup Language): Markup → Hypermedia
  • RASH: Markup → Hypermedia
  • reStructuredText: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
  • Scholarly HTML: Markup → Hypermedia
  • Scribe: Markup → Document
  • SGML: Markup → Metaformats
  • TeX: Markup → Document
  • Text Encoding Initiative: Markup → Document?
  • Wiki markup: Web → Hypermedia
  • XML: Markup → Metaformats
  • XML Schema Definition: Markup → Metaformats

Jsummers (talk) 15:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

That probably makes sense, though as you note some of them get a bit questionable to categorize... that was the appeal of vague categories like "Markup". Dan Tobias (talk) 20:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
On reconsideration, I think that leaving the general markup formats (SGML, XML) and the plaintext/richtext hybrid formats (Markdown, etc.) in Markup is as good as anything else. I still want to move HTML and friends, and probably TeX and others. Jsummers (talk) 14:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox