[...]
>
> Seems to be working now.
> I am a bit frustrated that asciidoc seems to be even pickier about
> syntax than XML,
> but it is more readable, and the built in macro processing may
> simplify what I am trying to do.

You might find it easier if you consider that asciidoc "syntax" is
embedded within a lot of natural language, whereas XML is a syntax
that encapsulates natural language and, as you say, in the process
makes the natural language harder to read.

So asciidoc markup is less of a syntax and more a pattern to be
recognised. Therefore the pattern has to be reasonably specific to
prevent similar natural language patterns being accidentally
recognised as asciidoc markup.

That is also why there is no formal syntax definition in the user guide.

Cheers
Lex

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"asciidoc" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc?hl=en.

Reply via email to