Whoops, I think this is at least a partial dup of T114445: [RFC] Balanced templates, which I think I was writing at the same time you were writing this.

In T114444#1695624, @cscott wrote:

Whoops, I think this is at least a partial dup of T114445: [RFC] Balanced templates, which I think I was writing at the same time you were writing this.

Yes, there is overlap, but, not a duplicate. This one is concerned about scoping more generally and the other one is concerned specifically about templates and also brings in all the discussion related to it (including the Q2 goal we have about the prototype of a opt-in / opt-out solution) that is somewhat about, but not entirely only about scoping.

Works for me. Let's let T114445 be all the "controversial" questions that require broader discussion; this task can be narrowly focused on implementation.

In T114444#1695661, @cscott wrote:

Works for me. Let's let T114445 be all the "controversial" questions that require broader discussion; this task can be narrowly focused on implementation.

This RFC is about the general notion of DOM scopes that is showing up in different guises in the <section> tags proposal, balanced templates proposal, and potentially others in the future. Those other RFCs are grappling with backward-compability concerns in specific problem areas (sections, templates) which is somewhat orthogonal to the semantics that will result from those proposals.

This RFC is about:

• does it make sense to generalize the scoping semantics more broadly and apply in other areas?
• identify the implications (pros / cons) of doing so.
• identify the implementation challenges and propose concrete implementation strategies that are applicable in all those scenarios.

A fully reversible wikitext2json and json2wikitext would be nice. Each object of wikitext (section, paragraph, magicword, transclusion, wilklink, exernallink, ref-tags, pre/nowiki/syntaxhighlight ....) could be representated as a k-v-pair where the value is a object or as array of objects. The main goal of this functionality is to make tooling of wikitext easier.
(one usecase could be: replace of misspelling in section and paragraphs but not in transclutions, reftags, external linktext, links, ...)

@Boshomi: We already have the functionality you are looking for. Parsoid's HTML can be converted back to wikitext. It can also be represented as JSON without too much trouble. See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Parsoid/MediaWiki_DOM_spec for background.

Is there a API for parasoid?

Boshomi: See https://en.wikipedia.org/api/rest_v1/?doc, or more generally https://{domain}/api/rest_v1/?doc

The meeting minutes suggest the action item was for @ssastry to reword this proposal so as to make it more concrete. @ssastry have you followed up on this? Any interest in pursuing it further?

There are multiple related proposals that have evolved slightly differently -- I want to consolidate them into a single proposal.

• If we want to restrict structure to just templates, there is the balanced templates proposal (T114445)
• If we want to make structure more generic in wikitext, dom scopes is one way to do it.
• If we want to formalize the notion of structure (dom scopes or balanced templates) into the notion of a type (which has additional benefits), we have typed wikitext.
  • If we generalize the notion of typed wikitext when applied to templates to capture additional information and meta data about templates in the "type structure", we have typed templates. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Parsing/Notes/Wikitext_2.0/Typed_Templates

The broader context for this is to support document composition from fragments. There are many different ways of achieving document composition but I think typed wikitext is my proposed pathway to that goal.

So, I think dom scopes in and of itself is an early notion / proposal. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Parsing/Notes/Wikitext_2.0 is the typed wikitext proposal that I discussed in 2017 devsummit . I think I wish to pursue the more full fledged proposal of a typing layer on top of wikitext which implements dom scoping semantics on various constructs. If necessary, we could close this one and open a new one for it, or repurpose this one for it, as appropriate. But, I can flesh out more details in the typed wikitext 2.0 proposals, as required.