[TW5] Newbie: Line-break question

[Thomas Guldstrand Larsen]

Hi,

Warning: newbie here...

When editing a tiddler, I write e.g

This is line one.

This in line two.

When saving the tiddler it becomes

This is line one. This is line two.

So I try:

This is line one.

This in line two.

and it becomes:

This is line one.

This in line two.

How to prevent that? I just want the formatting to be as I wrote it originally...I don't want This is line two to be in a new paragraph.

Is there any WYSIWYG editors for TW5?

Thanks

[Stephan Hradek]

Try

[Matabele]

Hi

If you don't mind an indent, a quick method I often employ is an abuse of the wikitext for definitions; after a lone semicolon is placed somewhere - colons can be used anywhere to place lines one after the other (but indented.)

;

:This is line 1
:This is line 2

I also abuse the semicolon for creating headers (beats entering three exclamation marks.)

;Header 1

some text

;Header2

etc

regards

[Måns]

Aaah - Nice tricks for effective writing!

Tanks a lot Matabele :-)

Cheers Måns Mårtensson

[Danielo Rodríguez]

This could be little pain in the ass. Specially for technical documents. Sometimes you want a line break but not a new paragraph.

[Ton Gerner]

Hi Danielo,

What's wrong with <br>?
Add it to your keyboard shortcuts plugin.

Cheers,

Ton

[Danielo Rodríguez]

There is nothing wrong. 

It is just ugly.

It is not just add the tag. HTML tags are not supported currently.

[Kolya]

Have to agree.

There's a standard how webeditors handle linebreaks. Heck, this editor I'm writing this reply in uses the standard.
But TiddlyWiki needs to invent its own? Is there any good reason for this?

Kolya

[Ton Gerner]

Hi Kolya,

See https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/443

Cheers,

Ton

[Stephan Hradek]

Am Montag, 26. Mai 2014 16:10:56 UTC+2 schrieb Kolya:

There's a standard how webeditors handle linebreaks.

Is there? Can you tell me where? I'm really interested.

[Stephan Hradek]

Am Sonntag, 4. Mai 2014 20:08:56 UTC+2 schrieb Danielo Rodríguez:

This could be little pain in the ass. Specially for technical documents. Sometimes you want a line break but not a new paragraph.

I learned from a colleague, who is a technical writer, that you should think about why you think there is the need for a line break.

One should not think so much about the representation of the information, but about the semantic, the meaning of it.

I couldn't come up with an example where a linebreak carried any meaning (except in code blocks, but that's another story). Can you?

[Danielo Rodríguez]

Maybe I need a rethink about it. Sometimes I want to separate information clearly in the same paragraph. Maybe I'm not managing the information well.

[Kolya]

It's a factual standard established by how the majority of online editors work.
Another standard is that some people will rather play dumb instead of openly disagreeing.
That should sound familiar to you.

[Jeremy Ruston]

I don't think sarcasm should have a place in this forum, and I'm disappointed to see it being used. This community is drawn from all the corners of the globe, with individuals coming together with a wide range of backgrounds. I'm convinced that the only way for it to work harmoniously is for us all to treat it each other with dignity and respect, and to always be patient with others.

> It's a factual standard established by how the majority of online editors work.

TiddlyWiki's paragraph handling is copied from MarkDown, which is becoming a very popular format for online writing. Classic MarkDown treats single line breaks as white space, just like HTML.

http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/

More recently, GitHub Flavoured MarkDown has gained popularity, which adds (amongst other things) the convention that a single line break produces an HTML <br> tag:

https://help.github.com/articles/github-flavored-markdown

The plan is to bring GFM-style linebreak handling to TW5.

Best wishes

Jeremy.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Jeremy Ruston
mailto:jeremy...@gmail.com

[Danielo Rodríguez]

Yesterday I checked few TWC and they gave me an idea : what about a secondary button that displays a different edit mode? Maybe using a different edit text widget where with a different set of rules.

[PMario]

On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 4:27:50 PM UTC+2, Danielo Rodríguez wrote:

Yesterday I checked few TWC and they gave me an idea : what about a secondary button that displays a different edit mode? Maybe using a different edit text widget where with a different set of rules.

It's not an editing problem, its a rendering problem.
We did a short discussion on the TW hangout [1] yesterday. ... TW allows to use <html> tags included into the wiki text syntax.

so something like this

<div>
...
</div>

mustn't be rendered as

<div><br>
...
</div>

So the problem is trickier as it seems ...

------------

On the other hand there is a syntax that keeps linebreaks.

"""
some multi
line
content
"""

The problem here is, that it ignores wiki syntax in the multi line code. ...

-mario

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=e2rDnFUqlWw#t=951

[Stephan Hradek]

Am Mittwoch, 28. Mai 2014 11:14:17 UTC+2 schrieb Kolya:

It's a factual standard established by how the majority of online editors work.

Ah. Okay. So it's not a written standard but the impression you got from your experience. I really hoped there is some standard defined because handling line breaks isn't a trivial task.

Let's pretend I have not seen the rest of your post.

[Alex V]

Single line breaks is not part of GFM, it is part of the additional features of writing on Github.

I am in favor of implemented the GFM features, but implementing single line breaks would make it a pain to write HTML in tiddlers. Github does not have this problem since you're not supposed to put HTML in Markdown.

[Matabele]

Hi

A suggestion -- perhaps several syntax rules could be changed within a """fenced block""", thus respecting both linebreaks and wikitext rendering within the block. Only the use of <html> need then be precluded from a fenced block.

Apologies in advance if this presents a rendering problem -- I am no expert in these matters and speak only from the point of view of an end user.

regards

On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 3:25:54 PM UTC+2, Thomas Guldstrand Larsen wrote:

[BJ]

Hi Thomas,
I have ported the ckeditor to tiddlywiki (its not part of the core functionality), which gives full styling WYSIWYG, but at present it does not support the features of tw5, such as wikiwords.
See the 'VisualEditor' here http://bjhacks.tiddlyspot.com/
All the best

BJ

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Alex

> I am in favor of implemented the GFM features, but implementing single line breaks would make it a pain to write HTML in tiddlers. Github does not have this problem since you're not supposed to put HTML in Markdown.

Thanks Alex, I did not know that the line break handling isn't part of GFM.

HTML has always been part of MarkDown:

http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html

Best wishes

Jeremy.

[Jeremy Ruston]

I meant to add one key difference between MarkDown and TW5 WikiText; in MarkDown:

> Note that Markdown formatting syntax is not processed within block-level HTML tags. E.g., you can’t use Markdown-style *emphasis* inside an HTML block.

Meanwhile TW5 *does* process wikitext within block-level HTML tags, which I think makes the HTML tag handling much more useful.

Best wishes

Jeremy

[Neil Griffin]

Sorry - coming slightly late to this discussion.  I just started using TW a couple of weeks ago, and still getting to grips.  Really liking it so far, but much to learn to make sure it stays useful as my tiddlercount grows.

This single linebreak issue has been bugging me too.  I can see the benefit of treating a single linebreak as whitespace, and it makes sense for that to be the default, and <br> //usually// does what I want, but it is really slow to type, as well as ugly.  Is it possible to implement a quicker-to-type and more WikiText-like syntax?  I'm thinking something like a backslash-terminated line.

Cheers,

Neil.

[Stephan Hradek]

Am Dienstag, 8. Juli 2014 23:30:20 UTC+2 schrieb Neil Griffin:

I'm thinking something like a backslash-terminated line.

Sure you COULD do that, but this would break the programmer's understanding of a backslash-terminated line which means: Ignore the linebreak! The next line belongs to this line.

[Matabele]

Hi

If you can put up with the indent -- the wikitext syntax for definitions may be used like this:

;Title
:Line1
:Line2

and later

:Another line
:And another

regards

[Matabele]

Hi

A further thought with respect the perennial question -- would it be possible to modify the colon markup (for definitions) to avoid the spurious line feed?

If I write:

:indent
::double indent
:::triple indent

 I get:

   indent

       double indent

            triple indent

-- but it would be nice if this gave what I expected.

This would also enable colons to be interspersed anywhere within text without the spurious blank lines -- I could then write:

Some text
:Line1
:Line2

Some more text
:Line3
:Line4

and get this:

Some text

   Line1

   Line2

Some more text

   Line3

   Line4

This, I believe would take care of most use cases.

regards

[Neil Griffin]

Perhaps, but the backslash was just meant as an example (I'm sure people here other than me have a better idea of what character combinations are available).  Maybe \n would be more acceptable.  Incidentally, a suitable character could even be used in the middle of a line of WikiText if needed (as <br> can be).

Matabele: The definitions syntax doesn't really work in the places I have been wanting a linebreak.  And it feels more intuitive to have the linebreak character at the end of a line rather than at the start of the next (or to have the option of having it in the middle, as mentioned above).

Cheers,

[Stephan Hradek]

Question: You came across this? http://tiddlywiki.com/#Hard%20Linebreaks%20in%20WikiText

[Matabele]

Hi

The standard (as far as there is one) is to use a double backslash: http://www.wikicreole.org/wiki/LineBreaks

[Matabele]

Hi

And in markdown:

 you end the line with two or more spaces, then type return

 -- which I think looks much better than a pair of trailing backslashes.

[Jeremy Ruston]

>  you end the line with two or more spaces, then type return

I'm not a huge fan of invisible formatting as it makes it very hard to visually scan content.

> The standard (as far as there is one) is to use a double backslash: http://www.wikicreole.org/wiki/LineBreaks

The Creole syntax isn't quite what I expected. They use double backslash on their own, so that this example would contain a linebreak:

Some\\thing

I'd expected the linebreak to be triggered by a double backslash followed by a newline:

Some\\

thing

I've created a ticket for adding wikicreole line breaks:

https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/678

Best wishes

Jeremy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Matabele

A further thought with respect the perennial question -- would it be possible to modify the colon markup (for definitions) to avoid the spurious line feed?

TiddlyWiki just spits out plain HTML <DL>/<DD> elements. The additional linespacing comes from the default CSS built into browsers; TiddlyWiki doesn't have any CSS affecting definition lists.

I'd be happy to refine the CSS but in cases like this I'd prefer to follow the lead of an existing CSS framework.

Best wishes

Jeremy

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Matabele]

Hi Jeremy

In that case, there appears to be a bug -- because:

<dd>some text</dd>
<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>
<dd><dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dd>

-- doesn't generate spurious blank lines, whereas:

:some text
::some text
:::some text

-- does.

regards

[Matabele]

Hi

Also -- try this:

Some text

<dd>some text</dd>
<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>
<dd><dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dd>

Some text
:some text
::some text
:::some text

regards

On Wednesday, July 9, 2014 9:59:10 AM UTC+2, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

[Matabele]

Hi

On Wednesday, July 9, 2014 9:57:26 AM UTC+2, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

The Creole syntax isn't quite what I expected. They use double backslash on their own, so that this example would contain a linebreak:

Some\\thing

I'd expected the linebreak to be triggered by a double backslash followed by a newline:

Some\\

thing

I agree, seems odd -- I think I prefer the latter convention. Also, it would be handy to have an easy way to add comments, especially within macros. Perhaps it would be possible to treat any text after the trailing double backslash as a comment -- thus:

Something\\comment
else

-- would appear as:

Something

else

-- haven't thought through the implications for code though.

 

I've created a ticket for adding wikicreole line breaks:

https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/678

I think that might get quite a number of users off your back :-)

regards

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Matabele

In that case, there appears to be a bug -- because:

<dd>some text</dd>
<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>
<dd><dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dd>

The HTML generated by TW5 actually looks like this:

<dl><dd>some text<dl><dd>some text<dl><dd>some text</dd></dl></dd></dl></dd></dl>

The blank lines are coming from the default margin on the <dl> element.

Best wishes

Jeremy.

[Matabele]

Hi Jeremy

It appears that <dd> elements may be used on their own (at least in the text field of TW5.) It is, therefore, unnecessary to add the <dl> tags around <dd> elements.

The <dl> tags are, however, required for <dt> elements. 

Is there no way of parsing the wikitext in such a way that <dl> tags are added only when a <dt> tag (;) is used?

Thus:

Some text
:some text
::some text

-- would give

Some text

<dd>some text</dd>

<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>

And:

;Term
:some text
::some text

-- would give

<dl><dt>Term</dt>

<dd>some text</dd>

<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dl>

regards

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Matabele

 

It appears that <dd> elements may be used on their own (at least in the text field of TW5.) It is, therefore, unnecessary to add the <dl> tags around <dd> elements.

Although <dd> elements work on their own, it is not valid HTML5 as I understand it:

http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/grouping-content.html#the-dd-element

Best wishes

Jeremy.

[Matabele]

Hi Jeremy

1. A dt element's end tag may be omitted if the dt element is immediately followed by another dt element or a dd element.

2. A dd element's end tag may be omitted if the dd element is immediately followed by another dd element or a dt element, or if there is no more content in the parent element.

This should be valid syntax which might lead to simplified wikification scheme without the need for the trailing tags that result in spurious blank lines:

<dl>

 <dt> Authors

 <dd> John

 <dd> Luke

 <dt> Editor

 <dd> Frank

</dl>

Unfortunately this doesn't render correctly in TW and I am unable, therefore, to experiment further.

regards

[Stephan Hradek]

Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2014 13:47:16 UTC+2 schrieb Matabele:

Hi Jeremy

1. A dt element's end tag may be omitted if the dt element is immediately followed by another dt element or a dd element.

2. A dd element's end tag may be omitted if the dd element is immediately followed by another dd element or a dt element, or if there is no more content in the parent element.

[…] Unfortunately this doesn't render correctly in TW and I am unable, therefore, to experiment further.

It renders correctly if you set the tiddler's type to "text/html".

So my assumption is that somehow the browser assumes we have XHTML where the closing tag is required.

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Matabele, Stephan

1. A dt element's end tag may be omitted if the dt element is immediately followed by another dt element or a dd element.

2. A dd element's end tag may be omitted if the dd element is immediately followed by another dd element or a dt element, or if there is no more content in the parent element.

I'm afraid that these rules just govern the way that the HTML text is parsed by the HTML parsing algorithm. The resulting DOM layout is the same as if the end tags had not been omitted.

 

This should be valid syntax which might lead to simplified wikification scheme without the need for the trailing tags that result in spurious blank lines:

It's not the trailing tags that result in the spurious blank lines. It's the browsers default CSS.

 

<dl>

 <dt> Authors

 <dd> John

 <dd> Luke

 <dt> Editor

 <dd> Frank

</dl>

Unfortunately this doesn't render correctly in TW and I am unable, therefore, to experiment further.

TW5 just accepts HTML elements within wikitext. It isn't a full HTML-compatible parser.

> It renders correctly if you set the tiddler's type to "text/html".

When the content type is set to text/html then the content does get parsed by the browsers HTML parser. That's why you can then omit those closing tags.

> So my assumption is that somehow the browser assumes we have XHTML where the closing tag is required.

No. When TiddlyWiki parses HTML elements it expects to find closing tags for all except the "void elements" such as BR and IMG.

Best wishes

Jeremy

[Matabele]

Hi Jeremy

On Wednesday, July 9, 2014 2:28:06 PM UTC+2, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

Hi Matabele, Stephan

 

It's not the trailing tags that result in the spurious blank lines. It's the browsers default CSS.

I'm still confused -- why then when I write:

<dl>
<dd>some text</dd>

<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>
<dd><dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dd>

</dl>

-- is the output different to:

:some text
::some text
:::some text

In the second case, it appears to be extra trailing </dl> tags that cause the spurious blank lines.

This is not the usage case that I encounter most often -- what I would like to write is:

Some text
:some text
:some text

:some text

Some text
:some text
:some text

:some text

-- and get this:

Some text

      some text

      some text

      some text

Some text

      some text

      some text

      some text

-- which works if I write:

<dl>

Some text
<dd>some text</dd>

<dd>some text</dd>

<dd>some text</dd>
</dl>

<dl>

Some text
<dd>some text</dd>

<dd>some text</dd>

<dd>some text</dd>
</dl>

Perhaps a better approach would be to introduce a completely different form unrelated to the syntax for definition blocks, perhaps making use of a leading 'minus' to indicate an indent:

Some text
- some text
- some text
-- some text

-- rendered as:

Some text

     some text

     some text

          some text

This might also be used in cases such as:

- THE first line of this paragraph is indented

regards

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Matabele

I'm still confused -- why then when I write:

<dl>
<dd>some text</dd>

<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>
<dd><dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dd>

</dl>

-- is the output different to:

:some text
::some text
:::some text

In the second case, it appears to be extra trailing </dl> tags that cause the spurious blank lines.

The HTML generated for the wikitext you've given is actually:

<dl><dd>some text<dl><dd>some text<dl><dd>some text</dd></dl></dd></dl></dd></dl>

I'd recommend using the browser "inspect element" menu item to inspect the HTML that TiddlyWiki is generating.

 

Perhaps a better approach would be to introduce a completely different form unrelated to the syntax for definition blocks, perhaps making use of a leading 'minus' to indicate an indent:

One issue is that the DL tag isn't designed for creating indents; HTML5 tries to map semantic meaning to tags. If you want an entirely visual effect such as an indent, that has no semantic meaning, then it should be done by styling a DIV tag.

http://css.dzone.com/news/rethinking-dl-dd-and-dt-html5

Best wishes

Jeremy

 

Some text
- some text
- some text
-- some text

-- rendered as:

Some text

     some text

     some text

          some text

This might also be used in cases such as:

- THE first line of this paragraph is indented

regards

[Stephan Hradek]

Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2014 15:11:55 UTC+2 schrieb Matabele:

I'm still confused -- why then when I write:

<dl>
<dd>some text</dd>
<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>
<dd><dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dd>
</dl>

-- is the output different to:

:some text
::some text
:::some text

Is it?

I just created a New Tiddler on tiddlywiki.com containing

<hr/>

:some text
::some text
:::some text

<hr/>

<dl>
<dd>some text</dd>
<dd><dd>some text</dd></dd>
<dd><dd><dd>some text</dd></dd></dd>
</dl>

<hr/>

 And this is what I see:

[Matabele]

Hi

I get:

regards

[Jeremy Ruston]

The examples render the same in Firefox and differently in Chrome. The reason is as I stated above: the extra margin comes from the browsers built in default CSS styles. These styles are often slightly different between browsers; that's the purpose of the stylesheet normalise that we use (http://necolas.github.io/normalize.css/). In this case, the normalise stylesheet isn't in fact normalising definition list layout.

Best wishes

Jeremy