--- Comment #31 from C. Scott Ananian <> ---
I think I just saved this patch from a premature +2.

I'd like to summarize what still needs to be done here:

1) In comment 29, Jesús Martínez Novo made a good suggestion to more widely
publicize the new <lines> name before it gets committed.  We almost
inadvertently introduced a conflict with <verbatim>, I'd like some greater
certainty that the new <lines> name proposal has been seen by a larger number
of editors/extension authors.  A mailing list thread might be a good way to
kick off this discussion.

2) In the comments on the patch, '----' was brought up as the last remaining
way that the current <lines> implementation differs from 'indent-pre' handling.
 I'd like to resolve this discrepancy: I really really *really* don't want to
complicate the parser more with Yet Another Slightly Different Way to handle
preformatted content.

3) I'd also like to review the code coverage issues a little more, to ensure
that we're sharing code (and CSS rules) to the maximum extent possible.  This
is to ensure that point #2 continues to hold in the future, and we don't
accidentally introduce subtle incompatibilities by changing only one side of a
code path.

Does anyone else have any remaining issues they'd like to see resolved before
this is merged?

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list

Reply via email to