21 Feb
2010
21 Feb
'10
8:13 p.m.
Right, there must be (and always is, in my experience,) at least one unambiguous and comprehensive mapping between the lightweight markup and whatever XML-style tagging you want to declare. And, in many cases, more than one. But HTML is usually first. TeX would also qualify. It's permissible to have, for instance, light-weight markup for syntactic artifacts. There shouldn't be anything XML can do that can't map to your lwml. Worst case, just incorporate your HTML/XML/TeX directly. The lwml just uses conventions and smaller tags to make the markup readable and more easily editable. If someone thinks this means dumbing-down the markup, then I think they misunderstand the purpose and the execution.