[Doc-SIG] docutils status report

Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) tony@lsl.co.uk
Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:11:27 -0000

Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote (in reponse to my quoted text):
>  >      Note that one won't be able to do::
>  >
>  >         And the final number is
>  >         1.
>  >
>  >      without a spurious list, but I reckon we can live with that!
>  >      (We have to pay for apparent simplicity with true complexity.)
>   Perhaps also require some text after the number in order to break
> the paragraph and start a numbered list.  Seems like a reasonable
> sanity check.

Ah - that's the idea I was missing. Thanks.

>   I'm not sure what you mean a "DOM model"; why not use the DOM with
> a specific structure?

I *think* that's just my bad terminology showing...

>  I've attached a short DTD I came up with while
> thinking about structured text & such.  ;)

[..has quick look..] Hmm, insofar as I understand DTDs (and one doesn't
need to to read that!) I think that sums up what I want. I'll know more
about using the DOM later this week...

>   There's documenting the code, and the format.  Concentrate on the
> later before worrying about the former.

I'm constitutionally unable to avoid writing comments in code (no, me
verbose!), but documenting the format is certainly what I prefer to
spend time doing (partly 'cos that *is* the spec, and redrafting the
spec in light of experience is a Good Thing, and of course feeds back
into the code). I can live with empty docstrings (or even slightly wrong
ones) for a while if needs be...


Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)      http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/
Well we're safe now....thank God we're in a bowling alley.
- Big Bob (J.T. Walsh) in "Pleasantville"
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)