Re: [Docutils-develop] emphasis/strong within literal_block?

[Bill B. <bb...@co...>]

On Tuesday, Dec 24, 2002, at 00:21 US/Eastern, David Goodger wrote:
> Are you sure about that?  <code> is an inline HTML element (like 
> <em>), and
> <pre> is a block/body-level element (like <p>).  How does O'Reilly use 
> them?
> The html4css1 writer produces <pre> for literal blocks and <tt> for 
> ``inline
> literals``.  I chose <tt> because it's neutral and generic, whereas 
> <code>
> is more specific.  It would be easy to use <code> instead of <tt> if
> required.

That'd make sense-- the spec really doesn't specify usage by example.   
Since I haven't actually immersed myself in tag definitions in a while, 
I decided to do a bit of research:

http://www.abiglime.com/webmaster/reference/html/tags/code.htm
http://www.abiglime.com/webmaster/reference/html/tags/pre.htm
http://werbach.com/barebones/barebones.html
http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/htmlguid/alphlist.htm

So-- as David kindly indicated-- <code></code> is used inline whereas 
<pre></pre> is used to mark the preformatted nature of large chunks of 
text.   Makes sense and also makes sense in the context of an article-- 
use /code/ to delineate an inline example and /pre/ to show off a big 
chunk of text.  (Making up abbreviations on the fly here-- /code/ seems 
like a nice way to abbreviate <code></code>).

I understand that :: basically leads to a literal block, but I don't 
see anything that causes a parsed-literal to be used instead?

Confused, but less so....

b.bum