On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 03:42:19PM -0700, Raymond Toy wrote:
> > I think both should be documented as being valid. I don't mind which one
> > is presented as more normal. I have edited the node in the documentation
> > slightly.
> >
> > It would be ok to change the example to show "@itemize @bullet{}" instead
> > of "@itemize @bullet" as long as the possibility of omitting the braces
> > was still shown somewhere. This might potentially make the documentation
> > easier to read, as the discussion of braces could be given less prominence.
> >
>
> I haven't been following too closely, but I think the manual should only
> have examples of recommended practice. If @bullet{} is the recommended
> way, then examples should only have that. If the parser is lax and not
> enforcing this, then that's ok. Just don't confuse people that @bullet and
> @bullet{} are both valid ways. (Well, unless you are really saying both
> are valid now and in the probable future, in which case, ignore me.)
It's not that the parser is "lax" in accepting "@itemize @bullet" - it was
the valid, documented and usual practice.
