On Saturday, March 27, 2021 at 11:52:00 AM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote: Everything you say you want to achieve could be done by leaving rst3 as is > - never touching it again - and creating a new rst4. It would be no more > work, and there would be no latent backwards compatibility issues. >
There are costs associated with doing nothing, some of which I've mentioned: learning costs for newbies and maintenance costs. There are several other costs of doing nothing. Call them "opportunity costs" if you like: - The design and code of rst3 are poor adverts for Leo. - rst3 leads our thoughts astray. The rst3 command should *handle* content, not *manufacture* content. - A clearer view of rst3 will encourage those with advanced needs to write simple scripts to create the content they want. *Summary* We must not rationalize past mistakes. Progress happens by learning from those mistakes and moving on. I've ripped out major projects before. Leo is stronger without Qt docks, and Leo will be stronger with a simplified rst3 command. Imo, an rst4 command would increase confusion. The rst3 command (and its horrendous docs) would be an ongoing distraction. I'd like to hear now from those who actually use the "advanced" features of rst3. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/3f5c0db7-4f69-45ff-bc31-2bee16c5dbfen%40googlegroups.com.
