From: David G. <go...@us...> - 2002-05-07 17:24:12
|
[moving to Doc-SIG for greater exposure] David Goodger wrote: >> However, a literal block isn't really the ideal way to represent an >> address block, is it? I've been mulling over an idea for a "verse" >> directive which seems to apply here. See >> http://docutils.sf.net/spec/notes.html#body-verse. What do you >> think? How about that ';;' syntax? Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) wrote: > As you say, the outstanding question is interpretation of inline markup > within a verse - i.e., in HTML terms, is it <pre> or not... Literal blocks use <pre> exclusively and treat all whitespace and line breaks as significant; no inline markup is recognized. In "verse blocks" (semi-literal blocks; anybody have a better name?) only line breaks and indentation are treated differently from a regular paragraph; inline markup like *emphasis* is recognized normally. > Thinking *about* verses, I'd obviously argue for allowing inline markup, > but am unfussed about lists I don't think lists or anything else are necessary. Verse blocks can be thought of as variations of paragraphs, which don't have nested constructs in the Docutils model. > I'm not *too* keen on the use of ";;", but it does have a clear analogy > with "::", and it's unlikely to be used "by mistake". I assume the rules > of how it appears are identical to those for "::"? (i.e., precede with a > space to suppress a colon in the output?) Perhaps, although I don't think people will want to end a paragraph with a semicolon. -- David Goodger <go...@us...> Open-source projects: - Python Docutils: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/ (includes reStructuredText: http://docutils.sf.net/rst.html) - The Go Tools Project: http://gotools.sourceforge.net/ |