[Doc-SIG] Terminology (was RE: formalizing Structured Text)
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)
Fri, 23 Mar 2001 11:39:27 -0000
Edward D. Loper wrote:
> I wanted to make sure my terminology was clear, because it looked
> like the indentation got messed up somehow. My terms are:
> * valid
> * invalid
> * illegal
> * undefined
Ah - that makes more sense. I wondered if that had happened.
In that case, I agree, and will try to conform myself.
Now - earlier on you called me to task on my naming of paragraphs and so
on (correctly so). I started to work up a list of "common terms", so we
could reach agreement (I surely need better terms, as we saw) but ran
out of time.
Could I ask you to run something together to float on the list? I think
(from inaccurate memory) we have something like:
text block -- one of the many sorts of paragraph
paragraph -- a "vanilla" text block
list item -- a text block that starts a list item
Python block -- a literal text block introduced by '>>>'
literal block -- a literal text block introduced by '::',
may contain blank lines
markup -- the result of colourising
literal string -- what goes within single quotes
Python string -- what goes within '#..#'
emphasised text -- what goes within '*..*'
strong text -- what goes within '**..**'
hmm - shift between 'text' and 'string' is clumsy,
but may be justified - they *are* strings, sort of.
URL -- shorthand (inaccurate) for a URI
quoted string -- something in '".."'
paragraph label -- we must have a better name for this
anchor -- a '..[anchor]' thingy - maybe we actually have
an "anchor block" as well
localref -- or "local reference" - refers to an anchor,
looks like '[this]'
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/
Give a pedant an inch and they'll take 25.4mm
(once they've established you're talking a post-1959 inch, of course)
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)