[Doc-SIG] Docststring markup process

[Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)]

Edward D. Loper wrote:
> I'd like STminus
> to expand to eventually be able to provide a formal definition of
> STpy.

I'm glad you say that, 'cos I'd like it to be so as well.

> But, at any rate, the idea of doing 2 PEPs is to see which one people
> like better.  I'm not planning on proposing STminus001 as a formatting
> convention.  I think that's not very reasonable.  But Maybe
> STpyminus099 (i.e., STminus with py extensions (such as #..# and list
> items without blank lines), version 99).

I think that it is reasonable to have "sibling" PEPs, which don't
compete, if they help elucidate things. And I think we *should* be
adopting the STminus work "officially" - i.e., it merits a PEP on those
grounds alone.

But just my opinion (!!!)

Tibs

--
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)      http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/
"How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive
continuity of ducks." - Dorothy L. Sayers, "Gaudy Night"
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)