Re: header syntax.

On 23 November 2012 14:27, Ryan Freebern <rfreebern@unionstmedia.com> wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:19 AM, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do you think headers well defined? I don't. Too many variants, too
>> many unclear and open to interpretation scenarios.
>
> Yes. There is atx style, which is
>
> # ... #*\n
>
> and setext style for h1 and h2, which is
>
> ...\n
> =+\n
>
> and
>
> ...\n
> -+\n
>
> The number of underline characters for setext style headers may need to be clarified further to avoid ambiguity, but if setext is widely used, a spec that invalidates it won't be welcomed.

Which is a problem I hope we can address.


>
> I think an idea that is falling by the wayside in these discussions is that markdown has two goals: first, it should be a syntax that can be transformed easily into presentational formats, and second, it should "look nice" in its native format. Our spec needs to make sure the format is well-defined in order to facilitate the first, but also flexible enough to fulfill the second, which is more subjective.

HIghly subjective I agree.


>
>> This is for the core/ baseline remember. Additional syntax can be
>> added with other profiles.
>
> If we plan to define a core that invalidates a significant number of existing documents, then I think we need to define the other profiles necessary to keep those documents valid simultaneously, or, again, risk rejection of our spec.

Which is in the objectives. After the baseline / core profile has been agreed.


>
>> That would be my preference, starting from simple, clearly defined
>> syntax and semantic, valid with current implementations, adding
>> complexity as we feel is justified.
>
> "Valid with current implementations" is only one half; "encompasses expected usage" is the other.

I haven't added that as an objective Ryan. The wiki outlines the
syntax I hope we can cover,
could you be more specific with that phrase please, encompasses expected usage

regards





-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 14:34:31 UTC