[Doc-SIG] Re: reStructuredText Markup Specification

[Doug Hellmann]

On Sunday 03 June 2001 16:59, Ken Manheimer wrote:

> I'll be interested to hear how it sits with others (especially those
> who've invested effort refining their stx sensibilities - tony,
> edward?)  I like it.

I would also miss using indention to denote subordinate paragraphs, but 
eliminating it might actually be a good idea.

We have a rather large zwiki at work now, and most users are able to get the 
output to look reasonable with StructuredText.  Since some renderers don't 
carry the indention through to the output, it occasionally confuses a less 
experienced user that *they* have to indent, but their pages don't come out 
that way.

I'm a bit confused (after only a single reading) by the 'some text'_ 
formatting that looks prevalent here.  Are those internal references to 
anchors within the document?  It looks a bit, um, maybe dirty is the word, I 
don't know.  What about using [] or {}?  Maybe I'm just bothered that the 
single trailing or preceding _ is unbalanced.  I'll read through again and 
see if a second pass makes this more clear to me.

Doug