Joel de Guzman wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>
>>>Sections: I'm perfectly happy with quickbook here, although our chunking
>>>needs tweeking a bit.
>>
>>I *really* like ReST section titles. Seeing
>>
>> [h1 The Way It Is]
>>
>>is nowhere near as meaningful as plaintext as
>>
>> ===============
>> The Way It Is
>> ===============
>
>
> The recommended Qbk markup is:
>
> [section The Way It Is]
>
> As to which is better, I don't know. Is it the ====== that's appealing?
>
> One problem I have with ReST is that the syntax is ad hoc.
> For example, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to
> formalize its table syntax in spirit-style EBNF. One big
> advantage of a formal syntax is that we are able to analyze the
> syntax in a high level. With that ability, we can simplify,
> extend, reform, the grammar at will and with ease without affecting
> the semantics. The simpler the grammar, the better. We've seen
> in recent discussions how QuickBook's simple grammar can be
> generalized into a set of simple rules that can be realized
> as a template library, thus providing user extensibility without
> coding. The ability to rewrite QuickBook in QuickBook is so
> enticing. To me, that far outweighs morphing the syntax into
> something like ReST's "easy-to-read, what-you-see-is-what-you-
> get plaintext markup".
FWIW, I think I agree with Joel on this one -- it's easier for me to
remember the same structure for all header types. Dave, I'm waiting for
a yuk on this, but I believe you could do what you want with quickbook
as follows:
[/=======================]
[section The Way It Is]
[/=======================]
From a distance you get the visual division. Oh, and you can use the
same section divider for all levels if you want.
Jeff
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
