On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:08:06 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
Right, so Tom says it isn't 100% ReST:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-08/msg01310.php
Right but did you see the followup?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-08/msg01319.php
Unfortunately, finding cases where the special markup characters don't
matter isn't the same as proving that they will never matter. The best
example of that I noticed in the spec relates to Enumerated Lists. This:
A. Einstein was a really
smart dude.
Is parsed as two lines of text, while:
A. Einstein was a really smart dude.
Will be treated as a single-item list. That sort of ambiguity is quite a
hindrance to machine-generation of ReST code. As the spec itself is very
loose, barring a deep read of the docutils code to figure out the rules
that exist only via the code implementation it seems to me the only robust
way around it is to just escape every special character.
--
* Greg Smith gsm...@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
