[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Comparing MarkDown and reST (Was: Consistent formating long descriptions as input data)

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:13:14AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Yes, me too.  But somewhere in this longish discussion it was
> suggested to find a solution for currently existing descriptions and
> ditch these cases later.  I do not want to spend my time to seek for
> the URL of this mail in the archive.  It sounds somehow reasonable
> to me for a transitional period (and same for '.').

Well, if you just keep them as transitional period without
highlighting them as "deprecated" in some way, you will end up with
them forever. We all know how slow we are with this kind of
transitions :)

Given that the current semantics was to exploit pre-formatted text to
output lists, I found absolutely reasonable render 'o' and '.' as
pre-formatted text and only the new kind of lists as "true"
lists. After all you wouldn't be breaking anything: pre-formatted they
were and pre-formatted they will be. If you want to gain something in
term of lists, just switch to the new supported syntax (when we'll
have one).


Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..|  .  |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: