Talk:Markup
From Just Solve the File Format Problem
Similar to what I said about Binary Data, I think that Markup should rarely if ever be a format's primary category. A format should be categorized based on its purpose, not its low level structure.
A lot of our Markup formats involve hypertext. The distinction between hypertext, hypermedia, and a lot of modern Document formats is blurry. For convenience, I lean toward lumping hypertext and hypermedia together, in a section named either "Hypermedia" or "Hypertext and Hypermedia". Even then, I'm not sure if a format like Markdown would be Hypermedia, or Document.
This proposed list of primary category changes includes all articles whose primary category is Markup.
- Accelerated Mobile Pages: Web → Hypermedia
- AIML: Markup → Scientific Data formats?
- Binary XML: Markup → Metaformats
- CommonMark: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
- Compressed Markup Language: Web → Hypermedia
- DTD: Markup → Metaformats
- Fountain: Markup → Document
- HTML: Markup → Hypermedia
- LaTeX: Markup → Document
- Markdeep: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
- Markdown: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
- MHTML: Web → Hypermedia
- OBML (Opera Binary Markup Language): Markup → Hypermedia
- RASH: Markup → Hypermedia
- reStructuredText: Markup → Document (or Hypermedia?)
- Scholarly HTML: Markup → Hypermedia
- Scribe: Markup → Document
- SGML: Markup → Metaformats
- TeX: Markup → Document
- Text Encoding Initiative: Markup → Document?
- Wiki markup: Web → Hypermedia
- XML: Markup → Metaformats
- XML Schema Definition: Markup → Metaformats
Jsummers (talk) 15:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- That probably makes sense, though as you note some of them get a bit questionable to categorize... that was the appeal of vague categories like "Markup". Dan Tobias (talk) 20:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
