> But if this is to be the official documentation source, I'm a little
> concerned about the lack of semantic cues. For example, in the snippet
> above, the same markup is used for both the example and the sample
> implementation; and the procedure signature is "weakly marked up"
> using whitespace. Personally, I'd like to see a more explict, semantic
> markup, particularly for key elements like procedure signatures. (I
> assume the syntax is extensible, maybe Alejandro could add some tags
> to address this.)
I will certainly add some tags. I absolutely agree with you.
I'll probably use a format based in tags (ala XML), something along
the lines of:
==== List length
<procedure>(length l)</procedure>
Returns the length of list {{l}}.
<examples>
(length '(1 . 2))
=> 1.5
</examples>
I'll probably do this by making it possible to define wiki-specific
tags whose definition is a Scheme function mapping the text between
the opening and closing tag to “lower-level” wiki language. These
definitions will probably live in a file on the wiki and get executed
by the sandbox egg.
What tags would you suggest? Examples, procedure, syntax? Hmm.
Thanks for your suggestions, Graham. You've raised a very valid
point.
Alejo.
http://azul.freaks-unidos.net/
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
