From: trans. (T. Onoma) <tra...@ru...> - 2004-09-11 15:53:25
|
For the sake of history and reference, proposal #5 is here by revised to #5b, fixing Oren's observation of "#5's displaced wart". We correct this by accepting Sean's proposal that single and double quoted scales not be distinguished --their distinction is _only_ for escaping purposes. --- - 5 # plain - '5' # quoted - "5" # quoted - > # folded 5 - | # literal 5 Thus there are really only 4 styles. P.S. How do we currently _not escape_ folded and literal styles? -- ( o _ // trans. / \ tra...@ru... I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way. -Mark Twain |
From: Clark C. E. <cc...@cl...> - 2004-09-11 16:17:16
|
On Sat, Sep 11, 2004 at 11:53:21AM -0400, trans. (T. Onoma) wrote: | --- | - 5 # plain | - '5' # quoted | - "5" # quoted | - > # folded | 5 | - | # literal | 5 | | Thus there are really only 4 styles. Single and double are different styles. | P.S. How do we currently _not escape_ folded and literal styles? You don't. This is what styles do. They are all different ways of writing characters based on specific use cases: plain: most limited style, but unadorned, simple double: you can express any unicode character here, but it is tedious single: good for strings with indicators and lots of \ and " folded: good for paragraphs where word-wrapping is not significant literal: good for source code where breaks are significant Every one of the styles has a specific rationale for presentation, they really arn't special tags (which you seem to be trying to have them be). If you really want these differentiations just use !tags that is what they are there for. Best, Clark |
From: trans. (T. Onoma) <tra...@ru...> - 2004-09-11 16:38:51
|
On Saturday 11 September 2004 12:17 pm, Clark C. Evans wrote: > You don't. =A0This is what styles do. =A0They are all different > ways of writing characters based on specific use cases: > > =A0 plain: most limited style, but unadorned, simple > =A0 double: you can express any unicode character here, but it is tedious > =A0 single: good for strings with indicators and lots of \ and " > =A0 folded: good for paragraphs where word-wrapping is not significant > =A0 literal: good for source code where breaks are significant > > Every one of the styles has a specific rationale for presentation, > they really arn't special tags (which you seem to be trying to > have them be). =A0 If you really want these differentiations just > use !tags that is what they are there for. Okay, I get you.=20 It jsut seems like escaping could be a useful _mode_ for any style. If that= =20 were possible then it would translate into four styles and two modes.=20 How do we _not_ escape literals, for instance?=20 =2D-=20 ( o _ // trans. / \ tra...@ru... I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way. =2DMark Twain |