Hello, John Kitchin <jkitc...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> hm. I would have interpreted it as an empty string with a strikethrough, > followed by a plus. It makes sense to require 1 or more characters > between them though. > > Why is +-+ not a - with a strikethrough? Because it is a table line? It was a bug I was not very motivated to fix. It should now be fixed on the export side, at least. I.e., "+-+" is exported as a strike-through. > Or + + is not a space with a strikethrough. I guess there are word > boundaries required. Striking through nothing doesn't make sense, does it? In any case, blanks are forbidden in the inner part of the markers. > I thought it was interesting that ++ + and + ++ show no strikethrough, but > ++ ++ does. Evidently a strikethrough on + +. An editor, on the other > hand, might want to strikeout excess spaces. We have to strike a balance here. Allowing emphasis markup around spaces has more cons than pros, IMO. > It isn't a big deal, I just changed the editmark syntax to avoid > clashing with org-syntax. The real issue here is that you're trying to bend Org syntax to fit a foreign syntax. It may imply pain. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
