[Doc-SIG] lists & blank lines (was re: backslashing)
Edward D. Loper
edloper@gradient.cis.upenn.edu
Mon, 16 Apr 2001 17:23:19 EDT
> [Edward D. Loper]
> > In theory, someone could read the following as a single list item,
> > even though our rules say its two::
> >
> > 1. I like the number e. This number is approximately equal to
> > 2.71828182846. But it's irrational, so that's an approximation.
>
> I'd say this is just another example of:
>
> > > > - xxxx x xxxx (one list item or a list item
> > > > xx xx x xxxxx followed by a paragraph?)
> > >
> > > Item followed by paragraph, with warning. Or error.
>
> As is:
>
> > > - I like numbers that are prime, like
> > > 2. I also like odd numbers.
But there's an important difference here. A parser will give a
warning for the second and third examples, but won't for the
first example. I would prefer to be able to say "if something
might be ambiguous to people, then we either issue a warning
or an error." But in the example about liking e, that rule
doesn't hold.
> > - To find the result, simply take C{x
> > - y}.
>
> (Unless the C{} syntax is used, in which case it's a single
> malformed item [second line should be indented] or an item followed
> by a paragraph [should be a blank line, and "C{x" should trigger an
> error]. In any case, it warrants a warning.)
The intention was that C{..} was used to stand for whatever colorizing
we decide we like. In that case, I agree that it should be 2 errors
(mismatched delimiters) and possibly a warning.
> Humans can parse text much more flexibly than software. Make the
> software (markup rules) quite strict, so that a text passing through
> the software without errors or warnings has no chance for ambiguity
> at the human-level. The best you can do is make the software say,
> "I don't understand what you mean here." Timbot's rule 12: "In the
> face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess."
That's been my goal so far. But the problem is deciding what's
ambiguous...
-Edward