Talk:Lightweight markup language

message: In the article, it lists Pandoc-based Github Flavored Markdown as being a proprietary implementation, but pandoc is (and I'm pretty sure always has been) GPL'ed.  Is there a reason for this?  Trombonechamp (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It’s possible that the license column in Comparison of implementation features is bogus and really belongs into Comparison of language features, i.e. it applies to the specification and not the implementation(s), since there can be several of the latter that can have all kinds of licenses, but usually only one of the former. In some cases, specification and reference implementation may basically be the same, though. — Christoph Päper 18:19, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pandoc markdown proprietary? 

message: Two things. History section.
First: There is an sgml dtd available: see my article: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2004/03/03/sgmlwiki.html
Second: editors may care to suspect the phrase "no known X" without a citation is an expression of ignorance rather than knowledge. I suspect that wikipedia pages are not enhanced by people listing what they dont know, (especially if they didnt bother to google eg "sgml dtd wiki")
 Rick Jelliffe (talk) 09:51, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "No known dtd" 

message: I think original author created org-mode around 2003, and it was added to emacs as built-in around 2007. Current start date of 2016 seems to be based on the last date that a website was revised.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.56.214 (talk) 17:57, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Org-mode is more like 2003 or 2007, not 2016 

message: We might want to include Balsamiq markup. — Christoph Päper 18:54, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balsamiq 

message: For example you can use pandoc with a variety of inputs (markdown, restructuredText, wiki, etc) and output it to another variety of formats.
https://pandoc.org/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.74.18.28 (talk) 11:42, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparing Outputformats does not make sense 

message: When one clicks on the release date column title, the release dates order alphabetically which makes no sense. Should I convert the release dates into ISO 8601? Simon Grant (talk) 09:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  release date ordering 

message: Following the H:ARC manual archiving process, I have created a first archive page and archived conversations on this page prior to 2015 that either were resolved or no longer relevant. - Dyork (talk) 02:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk Archive page created 

message: When TiddlyWiki was recently added to the first table, I was going to remove it because it's not really a "lightweight markup language" that is used outside of the TiddlyWiki instances. However, I notice that we also have PMWiki which similarly looks to be only used within PMWiki instances. To me it seems like this page should really be reserved for lightweight markup languages that are used widely, and between various applications or in different places. Languages such as AsciiDoc, Markdown, and even Github-flavored Markdown all make sense to me. Separate languages used only within one app do not. (Which is why I removed Slack and Whatsapp.) MediaWiki also makes sense to me as it is used in different apps.  Thoughts? Comments? Should we remove the standalone Wiki rows? - Dyork (talk) 02:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: To me, the information is both useful and interesting. Does that make it encyclopedic? Personally I'm unsure, but I would be sorry to see it deleted if that information doesn't have a home anywhere else. Simon Grant (talk) 07:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wonder if it would be better on a page like List_of_wiki_software with some kind of comparison table there? - Dyork (talk) 02:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  That seems to me a good way forward. "List of lightweight markup languages" or similar? Simon Grant (talk) 07:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

text: On further reflection, this appears to me as part of the vital educational role of an encyclopedia, beyond its purely documentary role. The lead from Wikipedia's own Encyclopedia mentions "cultural perspective (authoritative, ideological, didactic, utilitarian)", so plenty to choose from there. The fact of gathering all these different lightweight markup conventions together – which is also documenting the field of similarities and differences – can act as a prompt for harmonization as well as understanding, and it's good in this case that we are not dealing with any intellectual property or commercial interest, so no danger from conflict of interest. Simon Grant (talk) 08:34, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should standalone Wiki software be included as a lightweight markup language? 

message: As the major attempt to standardize Markdown, and with wide support, shouldn’t it be on this page as well?
Rsgranne (talk) 23:02, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Commonmark hardly adds new features to Markdown (except fenced code blocks and shortcut reference links), just more strictly specifies the syntax. Therefore, they usually do not need to be differentiated. — Christoph Päper 07:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

text: I would agree that CommonMark should be here in some form, as the name is recognizably notable in its own right. Alternatively, change the first column to include Markdown and Commonmark, if the consensus is that the difference is not significant. Simon Grant (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why isn’t CommonMark on the list? 

message: Surely if TiddlyWiki is on the list, DokuWiki should be?
It has a similar but not identical syntax to other LMLs.
Any objections to adding it in? I believe DokuWiki has more implementations than TiddlyWiki. 
Comparison of wiki software doesn't give data on popularity, and I can't find any good data on that, but most review sites list DokuWiki as one of the most popular ones – I seem to have seen evidence that it is second only to MediaWiki. Simon Grant (talk) 12:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Coming back to this, sorry I haven't added it — if anyone else wants to, please do! Simon Grant (talk) 17:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  DokuWiki 

message: The following were referenced as inspirations on the Markdown page but are not listed here:
* Grutatext
* EtText
It seems both have been around for quite a while, and so are possibly more important in a historical sense. (e.g. EtText references setext and  Perl POD as inspiration / analogue formats.)
As I am currently editing on only an iPad, I will leave for others to determine if one or both should be added to any of the tables on this page, or rather should merely be mentioned in a footnote or ‘see also’ section. Jim Grisham (talk) 22:44, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Jim Grisham (talk) 23:49, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional formats 

message: Satao is a new markup language inspired by HTML. https://satao.page/docs/
It reuses the HTML elements trying to reduce the syntax verbosity. It supports macro, encoding and escaping blocks. 2A05:87C5:3002:7800:AFAD:7F05:EF4A:C5CC (talk) 23:03, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Satao, a new markup language