Hi Torsten, First of all the problem of quotation marks inside cdata does not happen to me. I tested the latest version of DocBookWiki (from subversion) in Fedora5. So, either you don't have the latest version of DocBookWiki or you don't have Fedora5.
I remember that sometimes in the past I had problems with quotation marks, so I introduced some code to fix it (by escaping them). However it turned out that the problem actually was either with the version of the browser or with the version or the configuration of apache, so the fix was actually *creating* problems (by introducing extra slashes). So I removed it. About CDATA, I think that introducing --cdata ---- would be OK. The parser does support nested blocks, however, CDATA blocks, being somewhat different from the XML elements, are handled in a special way; they have to be preprocessed before the text/wiki is submitted to the parser (this is what is done currently with the <![CDATA[...]]> blocks). So, the parser will never have the chance to parse the block --cdata, because it has been already removed by the preprocessing stage. (There is also a post-processing stage which puts them back after the text/wiki is converted to XML/DocBook.) Since the matters are like this, then we don't have to use a block-similar markup for denoting CDATA sections. Any markup that does not create ambiguity would be OK. So, I would propose to use something like this: --[[xyz]]-- hoping that '--[[' is not so common in the text of documents and ']]--' may not be so common in the content of cdata sections. Do you have any better suggestion about these markups? They don't have to be symetric, they just have to be simple and unambiguous (otherwise, if they are not simple, then we better use <![CDATA[...]]> itself). I think that it is also better to be inline markup (instead of block markup), since <![CDATA[...]]> itself is inline. Then, going a step further, to make things simple (for the user, the documentation writter, not for us the programmers), we can define implied cdata sections to be like this: This block: --blocktag-- abc xyz ---- is equivalent to this: --blocktag <!CDATA[abc xyz]]> ---- I think that it can be usefull, in general. Regards, Dashamir --- Torsten Schlabach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Dashamir, > > > About the suggestion, maybe it is better to keep > > --code unmodified and to introduce another tag, > > e.g. --code-- which would wrap the content in > > CDATA. What do you think? > > I just had a look at "DocBook: The Definitive Guide" > and you're probably right. There should not be an > automatism to have a programlisting wrapped into a > CDATA tag in any case because the docbook standard > does allow for markup inside a program listing, > which can be useful. > > But then, why not keep it simple and introduce > > --cdata > ---- > > so it would be > > --code > --cdata > your program listing here > ---- > ---- > > That would also allow for something like: > > --code > --cdata > some not so important code in the beginning > ---- > <emphasis> > --cdata > more code > ---- > </emphasis> > ---- > > Or would nested blocks cause a problem for the > current version of the parser? > > WDYT? > > Regards, > Torsten __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Doc-book-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/doc-book-users
