LaTeX. That's a thing I should probably be more familiar with...

I like really impressed by how useful a well designed Markdown editor can be in previewing the final result.

Why can't we have the same thing for linguistics.

Imagine what a basic CFG syntax markdown could look like. I could write simple rules:

S --> NP VP NP --> Det N VP --> V NP

And they'd just be converted into a simple tree in the preview just like that (without lexical items in notes).

And we could have:

[.S [.NP Something ] [.VP [.V like ] [.NP this ] ] ]

There's no reason why not.

I'm also experimenting with other Markdown editors. It's a little disappointing that the pickings for Windows are pretty slim.

Over the weekend I switched my website writing (writing on websites not writing websites #genitivefail) from Open Live Writer to Typora.

Seems like a positive step toward better use of Markdown.

And some means of displaying xml data in a useful fashion...

I'm just beginning to start on a bit of a journey, a metaphorical one, of course, whereby I learn some basic coding skills.

• Certainly Python.
• Probably HTML5.
• Improved knowledge of XML well-formedness.
• More practice with Markdown.

Those are the starter goals. I know some about XML already. I regularly open up XML files in notepad++ to give the structure a looksee. I also know some HTML simply from 10 years of blogging...and I've picked up some Markdown just by happenstance.

We'll see where this goes...