https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=517428

--- Comment #12 from Christoph Cullmann <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to bonereader from comment #9)
> (In reply to Christoph Cullmann from comment #8)
> > (In reply to bonereader from comment #6)
> > > Just another detail to be considered: The KatePart documentation for 
> > > Syntax
> > > Highlighting
> > > (https://docs.kde.org/stable_kf6/en/kate/katepart/highlight.html)
> > > unfortunately describes the XML structure the way it is implemented and 
> > > not
> > > like it is defined in the XSD. So changing the code to comply with the XSD
> > > may break exiting private highlighting definitions. It would also mean 
> > > that
> > > the documentation needed to be changed as well.
> > > 
> > > I'm not an expert in that, but I suppose changing the XSD and adapting the
> > > view "official" highlighting definitions that use that feature would be
> > > easier. Eliminating the "ignored" attribute would be bad however, as the
> > > LaTeX example shows - except if one allowed empty "char" attributes.
> > 
> > Could you test if the current code works as expected?
> > 
> > A missing char attribute implies that the sequence is ignored.
> 
> Hi, yes the current code works as expected, meaning as it is implemented,
> but not as it should ;-). 
> 
> An empty "char" attribute is currently not a workaround for the ignored
> "ignored" attribute. I meant it just as an alternative, because you where
> thinking about removing "ignored". So it would be either handling "ignored"
> attributes or not ignoring empty "char" attributes.

I went now the way you proposed and adapted the code to the documentation.
I think the only thing that is missing in the documentation is that a missing
char="" attribute has the meaning that the spell checker should ignore that
sequence (aka replace it with the empty string).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

Reply via email to