On Mon, December 5, 2011 10:46 am, Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
here are some of the notable things you might see, which adhere to the rules of zen markup language:
Together with those same things in HTML.
01. headers are preceded by at least 4 blank lines.
Headers are preceded by one of <h1>, <h2>, <h3>, <h4>, <h5> or <h6>
02. headers are followed by exactly 2 blank lines.
Headers are followed by </h1>, </h2>, </h3>, </h4>, </h5> or </h6> depending on how they were started.
03. structural elements are bounded by blank lines.
Structural elements are bounded by <div>...</div>
04. paragraphs are not indented (in the input file).
Paragraphs are bounded by <p>...</p>
05. the linebreaks are consistent with the p-book. 06. linebreaks don't necessarily need to be retained.
Line breaks may be consistent with the p-book, but will not necessarily be retained on display.
07. end-of-line hyphens are considered to be "soft", 08. but a tilde indicates a preceding hyphen is "hard".
End-of-line hyphens must be merged with the following word. If a hyphen is only used for syllabification it should be replaced with "".
09. italics are indicated by surrounding underscores.
Italics are bounded by <i>...</i> or <em>...<em>
10. lines beginning with " > " indicate a blockquote.
Blockquotes are bounded by <blockquote>...<blockquote>, and may contain paragraphs (<p>...</p>) or any other structural division (<div>...</div>).
11. the first section is considered as "the title page".
The title page is that structual element which has a class defintion of "title_page" (e.g. <div class="title_page">...</div>).
12. the table-of-contents must be the second section.
The table of contents is that structual element which has a class defintion of "toc" (e.g. <div class="doc">...</div>). The actual table of contents entries are bounded by <ol>...</ol> or <ul>...</ul> and each individual entry is bounded by <li>...</li>
and again, none of this "tagging" would be hard to do in a typical text-editor, or your favorite wordprocessor.
And again, none of this "tagging" would be hard to do in a typical text-editor, or your favorite wordprocesser. There is nothing fundamentally "wrong" with inventing a new markup language like z.m.l. (although I have doubts as to its completeness), but it's an attempt to reinvent the wheel -- and a fifth wheel at that. I think that we should stick with what works.