This whole debate has got silly.
RFC 111 V1 covered both the whitespace on the terminator and the
indenting - there was a lot of debate that this was two things - more were
in favour of the terminator and there was more debate on the indenting.
Therefore I split this into two RFCs leaving RFC111 just dealing with the
terminator.
RFC 111V3 represents what I believe was rough concenus (ALA IETF meaning)
on the terminator issue. (The debate had been quiet for several weeks)
Michael Schwern has gone as far as doing a prototype that almost covers
it and with the few things I have posted earlier today could be extended
to handle all cases.
Next comes the issue of the removing whitespace on the left of the content.
There are several possibilities, these are now mostly in RFC 162. These are:
1) There is no processing of the input (current state)
2) All whitespace to the left is removed (my original idea)
3) Whitespace equivalent to the first line is removed (not a good solution)
4) Whitespace equivalent to the terminator is removed if possible (ALA
Michaels prototype) - this could be workable.
5) Whitespace equivalent to the smallest amount of the content is removed
(current RFC 162 preffered solution)
When measuring whitespace how does the system treat tabs? (be realistic
and dont FLAME)
So where do we go from here?
A) Do we want one syntax or two? (<<HERE and <<<THERE)? I would prefer
one but would accept two.
B) Is there rough concencus on the terminator issue at least?
C) Which of the 5 cases of handling the whitespace in the content might be
agreed upon?
D) Decide how to treat tabs in the indenting. (Suggest =8 spaces plus
allow prama to override)
E) If the answer to A) is one and we have B) and we agree on 4) or 5) for
the whitespace and some treatment of tabs, then I should cancel RFC 162 and
just put everything back into RFC 111 (including Michaels Prototype) and lets
try and freeze it and move on to other things.
Peace!
Richard
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
