[Doc-SIG] reST block quotes
Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:17:35 +0200 (IST)
On 2002-12-15, fantasai wrote:
> Beni Cherniavsky wrote:
> > Then note that "-- " is the standard singnature separtor.Since then it's
> > alone on the line, this is not an issue, just a point to document.
> > Also note that I use " -- " for a long dash -- probably a LaTeX-induced
> > habit; I saw some other people writing so.Stupid word wrapping can well
> > put "-- " at the beginning of a line in running text.Again not an issue,
> > just document that "-- " must come after an empty line (?).
> Would using three dashes solve these problems?
Yes but there is no big need. These are not real problems, they only make
the recongnition rules more subtle.
> > About email reading, also note that ">>> " becomes ambiguos between
> > doctest blocks and some email clients that compact nested "> " quoting by
> > omiting the spaces.
> Yes, that is true. That means either quoted blocks would
> have to be implemented as an option, defaulting to 'off'
> for backwards-compatability, or at least one space must
> be required between quote characters.
Another option, not completely automatic but easy to use:
+## Any bogus quoting style is recognized as such by a line before and/or
+## after the paragraph the contains only the quoting string (which must
+## be non-alphabetic, I don't see a good way to accomodate "FOO> ").
+ Nested quotes are recognized, generalizing the current mechanism.
Trouble begins when breaking nested quotes (assume I wanted to place a
non-quoted comment between ...). and Nested... -- they won't be recognized
as nested. In such (all?) cases, demand a space between the quoting
levels ("+ >#").
There is an ambiguity with lists => outlaw empty list items.
Diverectives can be implemented for declaring certain quoting style to
have some meaning (e.g. "# " == Python comments).
> Requiring at least one space before the quote character
> might not be a bad idea. It improves readability IMO.
But most mailers don't do it and manually converting is a huge pain.
> > Also the "On Someday, Random Writer wrote:" is probably an
> > attribution too.
> It is, but it's not practical to parse that since
> people use so many different formats. It would have
> to be treated as a paragraph, which really isn't
> that bad.
> > Now how do you handle a quote that's broken in the middle and resumed?
> As multiple blockquotes. How would you do it with the
> current syntax?
OK. Just take care that different parts of an interrupted quote are at
the same nesting level (space compation is evil in this respect and should
probably be outlawed).
Beni Cherniavsky <firstname.lastname@example.org>