El domingo, 9 de diciembre de 2018, 0:32:57 (UTC+1), Lex Trotman escribió: > > > Currently there isn't a specification, its on the todo list of a > number of people, but nobody has had the time available to do it. >
??? So when people in asciidoctor write code they do it on the fly. Someone says "I'm going to implement this". Nobody writes it down, the coder programs it, but has no time to write what the program was supposed to do. So to know what asciidoctor does they skim the code. Having multiple implementations is good for the ecosystem If they are compatible. There is no specification, so. Multiple implementations of what? Do asciidoctor and asciidoc.org have a private chat to talk what the standard is? With no written standard, what you are going to get is divergent implementations and probably a fight to rule standard. > (eg Asciidoc > Python can't be used by github, but Asciidoctor being Ruby can be), > but the intention is to try to avoid the markdown scenario where > everybody has their own variant. > No success. You already have two incompatible variants. And only because nobody else has decided to implement it. > > Hopefully the specification effort will begin in the new year. > Once again. The implementation must already be there, somewhere. I don't believe they write code from the empty air. But apparently they keep it like trade secret. > > > > > Reading users guide, examples, blogs and FAQs I can gather scattered > information so I can "reverse engineering" for a parser, but with are lot > of doubts. > > One of the supposed advantages of asciidoc over markdown is that there > are not a lot of incompatible flavors. But it looks that the standarization > of asciidoc comes from having only two "de facto" parsers: asciidoc.org > and asciidoctor.org, (and now asciidoc3.org?) > > Effectively the current standard is asciidoctor, its the one actively > maintained and enhanced. What you say is that asciidoc is not a standard format, but the implementation of asciidoctor. The (current) committee that rules asciidoc format is in asciidoctor. They deliberate what enhancements, reforms and changes to make. And when they reach an agreement, instead of publishing a specification, they publish the new version of the toolchain and an article with an overview of changes. I suppose that until someone dethrones asciidoctor as the owner of standard... maybe looking things from this point of view the trade secret concept makes sense. People who writes in asciidoc must trust in asciidoctor, not in a inexistent public standard format named asciidoc. Is this the portable standard that was going to end with markup languages wars? I'm really astonished. Well, if you don't have a huge investment in Asciidoc Python, then the > advice is to use the Asciidoctor implementation, as I said its the one > thats maintained and enhanced, so not needed at the moment. > > I am translating a book and I wanted to convert it to several formats, basically FB2 and HTML. I wrote the book in asciidoc format and wrote a translator in Pascal language to generate FB2. My parser is very simple because my documents are very simple, I only used a few features. I could have used any lightweight markup language (in fact, I could have created my own markup), but I chose asciidoc because I read it was very standard and I wanted to remove the dust of my programming skills programming a parser. After programing a simple parser that only was aware of a few markup features, I was going start implementation of the full-compliant asciidoc parser. But there is no such thing, there is no specification to be full-compliant of. I wanted to write a parser for a standard format not to chase a hidden moving target, so I won't do more investment in Asciidoc, let it be Asciidoc-python or Asciidoctor. Asciidoctor and asciidoc-python guys, you'd better move to the top of the list writing a specification, stop anything you are doing, and publish the specification, better today than tomorrow, moreover better yesterday than today. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
