Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
I like that decently. Obviously, making authors specify section numbers would be absurd.Or number the sections like this:=section # blah =section ## subblah =section ### subsubblah =section ## subblah2 =section # blah2 And let the author only worry about "sectioning" and not about numbering at all.
It still seems like we have a lot of issues in general with things like bullets, etc., not easily knowing when they're only one paragraph vs. more than one paragraph. I'm still not sure what the preferred "generic grouping" mechanism is for cases like this, where you need to specify where a previous format ends.
In any event, this is good enough for now. Let's redirect all discussion on A Better Pod to the Pod-people list, and go with what we have unless and until they tell us otherwise.
Sean M. Burke wrote:
On the Pod-people list, we have mostly decided that those inference rules are more trouble than they are worth, precisely because they are unpredictable, and typically there's no way to disable them. I am entirely happy with a future for Pod where no formatter (or, god help us, a parser) thinks it its duty to turn "an O(N) solution" into "an C<O(N)> solution".
You are my hero. MikeL
