7 ms·

I'm sure that could be done but I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do. I think it's important for people to understand the syntax and what they're using.

I'm sure that could be done but I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do. I think it's important for people to understand the syntax and what they're using. I think it'd be cool to do a side-by-side web app where you can type your Polymath code and see the resulting page at the same time.

alok-g 7y ago
Think about how many people in the world are missing on the benefits of such markup languages because they aren't interested in non-WYSIWYG/M. The market potential could be much higher if syntax learning can be avoided.
- johnmorrison 7y ago
  It really depends on the specific user and why they need the language. Ultimately, Polymath is meant to provide a file format that will work for the long term, so I don't think users should be always getting an abstraction of the language through WYSIWYG, because then they don't understand the files they are preserving. If you only care about having a nice blog, then sure, WYSIWYG might be convenient, but the whole reason for using Polymath instead of pure HTML/CSS + JS libraries is because it gives you the same/similar level of convenience as a WYSIWYG editor without losing exactness and understanding.
  - alok-g 7y ago
    I follow that viewpoint and am OK with the direction being taken. On the other hand, even after asking many, I have never received a good answer to why the exactness and understanding cannot be obtained with a WSYIWYG/M markup editor.
    - johnmorrison 7y ago
      They abstract away from the underlying code. You wouldn't be able to tell the difference between {b Bolded} {b text} and b Bolded text this becomes especially concerning with TeX, custom styling, etc
      - alok-g 7y ago
        That makes sense, and I can imagine that. However, should it not be possible for the software to find a minimal cover for the formatting that would produce the same visual output, thereby practically recovering what hard-crafted markup would have been? Thanks.
        johnmorrison 7y ago
        Yeah, if I'm interpreting your words correctly, this would be like turning p {b This} {b text is} {b bolded} this isn't into p {b This text is bolded} this isn't But then the issue is as follows: In Polymath, I'm planning on allowing basically arbitrary CSS styling by parent, id, class, etc. So if the user later wants to do something like put a rounded box around each span of bolded text, those two, while initially looking identical in WYSIWYG, end up completely different.
        alok-g 7y ago
        I can take that. Thanks.

alok-g 7y ago

Think about how many people in the world are missing on the benefits of such markup languages because they aren't interested in non-WYSIWYG/M. The market potential could be much higher if syntax learning can be avoided.

johnmorrison 7y ago
It really depends on the specific user and why they need the language. Ultimately, Polymath is meant to provide a file format that will work for the long term, so I don't think users should be always getting an abstraction of the language through WYSIWYG, because then they don't understand the files they are preserving. If you only care about having a nice blog, then sure, WYSIWYG might be convenient, but the whole reason for using Polymath instead of pure HTML/CSS + JS libraries is because it gives you the same/similar level of convenience as a WYSIWYG editor without losing exactness and understanding.
- alok-g 7y ago
  I follow that viewpoint and am OK with the direction being taken. On the other hand, even after asking many, I have never received a good answer to why the exactness and understanding cannot be obtained with a WSYIWYG/M markup editor.
  - johnmorrison 7y ago
    They abstract away from the underlying code. You wouldn't be able to tell the difference between {b Bolded} {b text} and b Bolded text this becomes especially concerning with TeX, custom styling, etc
    - alok-g 7y ago
      That makes sense, and I can imagine that. However, should it not be possible for the software to find a minimal cover for the formatting that would produce the same visual output, thereby practically recovering what hard-crafted markup would have been? Thanks.
      - johnmorrison 7y ago
        Yeah, if I'm interpreting your words correctly, this would be like turning p {b This} {b text is} {b bolded} this isn't into p {b This text is bolded} this isn't But then the issue is as follows: In Polymath, I'm planning on allowing basically arbitrary CSS styling by parent, id, class, etc. So if the user later wants to do something like put a rounded box around each span of bolded text, those two, while initially looking identical in WYSIWYG, end up completely different.
        alok-g 7y ago
        I can take that. Thanks.