--On Wednesday, August 09, 2006 7:29 AM -0400 Jean-Lou Dupont
<mediawiki_mailinglist(a)jldupont.com> wrote:
I was merely expressing what I believe is a
requirement (re: WYSIWYG for
corporate environments) that would limit the friction of the adoption
process of MediaWiki. Furthermore, I believe that a full WYSIWYG
presentation layer "a la Pagemaker" is not necessary but at least a decent
table entry tool would be a great start!
This does highlight an important distinction: content versus presentation.
People qualified to do one may not be qualified to do the other. (Do you
let newspaper reporters typeset their own stories?) Even in HTML, tables
are abused to implement both content and presentation.
I would argue against WYSIWYG because it blurs this distinction.
Your example here points out that structural markup is useful to the
content-provider, and so there needs to be some easy way to enter that. But
I think it's a mistake to confuse that with WYSIWYG.