- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:25:47 +0000
- To: public-markdown@w3.org
On 22 November 2012 15:29, David J. Weller-Fahy
<dave-lists-public-markdown@weller-fahy.com> wrote:
> * Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> [2012-11-22 03:28 -0500]:
>>
>> Just to confirm the 3 you mention.
>>
>> == underline (h1 only)
>> -- underline (h2 only)
>> #{1..6} All values.
>>
>> What a mess! We do need to address the corner cases though and tidy
>> them up? E.g. terminating #'s, matching number of hashes, text after
>> hashes etc.
>
> Regarding matching number of hashes, do we want to require that? Or
> just a single terminating hash? I think a single terminating hash would
> be sufficient, as the only purpose of the terminator is to indicate the
> end of the header.
>
>> Alternative view. For a core profile. Support only #'s, with
>> terminators. That allows conformance across implementations.
>>
>> Then the variations would fall into either intermediate or
>> app-specific profiles?
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I like the idea of only having one method of identifying the headers and
> levels, and using the most flexible method (hashes with terminating
> hashes) as the method in the spec. I also like that this prevents
> confusion between horizontal rules and headers.
Even simpler (and currently conformant)
# header 1
## header 2
### 3
....
I.e. removes the potential mess with termination, subsequent text etc.
Since this is the simplest, currently conformant header definition,
I'd propose that
as going into our note.
regards
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2012 16:26:15 UTC