On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 2:13 AM, Lex Trotman <[email protected]> wrote:
> If it were a block it would terminate the list, but since its a > paragraph, and the first one after the list item, it will be included > in the list without needing list continuation +s, see > http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/userguide.html#X64 list behaviour. > Aha! You are correct. I forgot about that rule when writing my response. I decided to go a different way here in Asciidoctor. I allow the "normal" style (it doesn't break the list), but all other styles I still allow to break the list. That's because I considered it very inconsistent to treat admonition paragraphs (and other paragraphs masquerading as blocks) different from delimited blocks. This is definitely a topic I want to discuss in the spec because I think we should go the other way on this. But I don't want to dictate the outcome here. I'm merely suggesting that we need to discuss it. Btw, I do consider a paragraph to be a block. I just don't consider it to be a delimited block. Internally, I have a much richer model in this regard than AsciiDoc Python, because it's practically impossible to develop extensions consistently without this information in the model. In conclusion, Asciidoctor and AsciiDoc Python differ here, but I feel strongly that it's an implementation issue and we need to address it in the spec to decide what is "to code" and what isn't. I'll note it down in my list. Regardless, if you add the list continuation lines, it will work in both implementations. Cheers, -Dan -- Dan Allen | http://google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "asciidoc" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
