Comments on: A MakeDoc Decision Needed
REBOL Technologies

Comments on: A MakeDoc Decision Needed

Carl Sassenrath, CTO
REBOL Technologies
29-Dec-2009 0:11 GMT

Article #0446
Main page || Index || Prior Article [0445] || Next Article [0447] || 12 Comments || Send feedback

I have a question for MakeDoc users...

All of our websites are built using MakeDoc. Recently, to support the new R3 document wiki, MakeDoc was enhanced. One enhancement was intended to make MakeDoc markup a bit more compatible with MediaWiki (the wiki used for DocBase on

Specifically, the top level heading markup:


was changed to:


as standard in MediaWiki.

However, this is problematic, because it is the same syntax as used for a console output line, which makes the line a different color, as shown here:

The lines:

print 123
==  123


print 123

So, one thing leads to the next. This required R3 Docs to use just a single "=" followed by spaces or a tab for console response.

As we proceed to update the entire website we need to make a decision on this. Keep it as "===" or change it to "=="?

It's a simple question, but not so simple to answer.

Converting the docs is the easy part.

PS: I must admit I prefer the "===" because it is easier to see when scrolling through large documents.



Gregg Irwin
29-Dec-2009 16:41:12
How hard will it be to write a processor to prep things for MediaWiki?

What happens when something other than MediaWiki is used?

I vote to keep ===.

29-Dec-2009 20:21:48
How about other Wiki?

Do they use similar markups?

I vote to keep '==='

And as Gregg has suggested, we can have a processor to 'target' the output for MediaWiki.

29-Dec-2009 21:31:46
+1 to keep "==="
29-Dec-2009 22:11:15
I vote for === as well.
29-Dec-2009 23:06:09
Keep ===. Thanks.
30-Dec-2009 0:28:23
Didn't we have -1-, -2-, etc at one stage?
30-Dec-2009 0:51:42
I'm for keeping ===
Carl Sassenrath
30-Dec-2009 10:55:40
Thanks for the quick replies. It will remain ===. I prefer that also.

The R3 Docs will be converted to use that same format. It is also easy to convert MediaWiki docs.

A: Yes, -1- was proposed, but not sure how many people used it. But, it's compatible if docs use it.

30-Dec-2009 20:04:11
I was also going to vote for keeping === so it's cool that was decided.
Lance Boyle
30-Dec-2009 20:14:55
Drat! I was going to vote for adopting h1, h2, h3 and not getting caught with these cryptic tagging schemes that Mediawiki use.
1-Jan-2010 9:00:52
why not a wiki in rebol ?

when it's becoming tough you run to PHP arms what kind of message regarding rebol are you sending?

The only convennient thing in WIKI/php is that it exists and not te WIKI/rebol.

And why not doing a wiki rebol engine able to exploit the php wiki database ?

4-Jan-2010 23:42:31
shadwolf - The reason that MediaWiki exists and is used a lot (e.g. Wikipedia) and has hundreds of extensions is indeed an important one. You don't have to invent the wheel over and over again. But I'm sure, as soon as you or someone else comes up with a Wiki written in Rebol, Carl will be more than glad to switch over. But until then ...

Post a Comment:

You can post a comment here. Keep it on-topic.


Blog id:



 Note: HTML tags allowed for: b i u li ol ul font p br pre tt blockquote

This is a technical blog related to the above topic. We reserve the right to remove comments that are off-topic, irrelevant links, advertisements, spams, personal attacks, politics, religion, etc.

Updated 3-Mar-2024   -   Copyright Carl Sassenrath   -   WWW.REBOL.COM   -   Edit   -   Blogger Source Code