Textboard.org should have used this instead of a custom markup language:
http://web.archive.org/web/2017*/http://cairnarvon.rotahall.org/misc/sexpcode.html
That looks a bit like Scribe and Skribe.
Scribe: https://www-sop.inria.fr/members/Manuel.Serrano/scribe/doc/scribe.html
Skribe: https://www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/fp/Skribe/
>>1
What is the advantage of that? That SexpCode thing is also a custom markup language. Even worse, it is an esoteric markup language. The one used by SchemeBBS is at least reminiscent of the widely-used and intuitive Markdown format.
>>3
How is Markdown intuitive? It is completely arbitrary. Do you really think it makes sense to denote italics with single asterisks, and bold with the same symbol, just double? At least SchemeBBS is somewhat consistent, you use double symbols everywhere and the symbols are distinct. But SexpCode is not only consistent, but also straightforward. If you want bold you use b, if you want italics you use i. What could be more intuitive than that?
The S-expression is delimited by curly braces rather than the traditional parentheses, because they do not occur in natural language.
They occur a lot in programming languages, however. The {- delimiter suggested to wrap pre blocks is pretty ugly.
>>3 Complaining about esoteric on a mit scheme written bbs.
The beep boop goes beep boop and boop beep, is there understanding?
{beep|beep is a GGP axiom and boop ≠ beep}
boop ∈ beep