On May 31, 2016 10:15:02 PM "Br. Elijah Schwab, O.Carm"
<[email protected]> wrote:
On May 30, 2016 08:37, Henry So Jr. wrote:
- <marker> (with no (</marker>), which may confuse people used to XML)
- <marker/> (this is XML-like, but may be hard to remember)
- $marker$ (which makes it obvious this is different, but is different)
I would be in favor of allowing both <marker> and <marker/>.
That proposal makes sense, and if we go with that syntax, that's what we'll do.
One question though concerning styles that now span syllables (<b>, <i>,
etc) would <b/> limit the style to the current syllable only, or are
these tags not affected by the proposed marker syntax?
Existing tags are *not* markers and will need to be closed when their
effect is no longer desired.
This difference is the reason we are divided. Using a similar syntax for
something with different semantics leaves the opening for questions such as
yours.
Using $..$ seems to be too confusing with math mode.
We can choose some other delimiter, but Jakub Jelinek's point about extra
things needing escaping is very true as well.
That said, it seems people generally prefer the xml-like syntax, so that's
probably how it will end up, confusion and all.
Henry
_______________________________________________
Gregorio-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users
