Hello Steffen, Thanks for your comment.
Closing a inline formatting stack with a single closing bracket was a design decision meant to reduce the noise added to running text. It's meant to keep the running text more readable. For example: <bold><size +2><smallcaps>some text</smallcaps></size></bold> vs <bold, size +2, smallcaps<some text> or even the sugared version: <b, sc, +2<some text>. I'm not familar with SGML, but will have a look. On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso <[email protected]> wrote: > Ralph Corderoy <[email protected]> wrote: > |> The project on github: https://github.com/cloutiy/tml > |> Extensive documentation on its wiki: > https://github.com/cloutiy/tml/wiki > | > |Interesting, and I'll look more when I've time. > | > |> Inline formatting has a nice clean syntax that resembles HTML, but > |> much cleaner - you just need 1 closing tag. > |... > |> Here is some <b<bold text>. > |> Here is some <i<italic text>. > |> Here is some <smallcaps<small cap text>. > |... > |> Here is <bold, size +2<bold and larger text> > | > |I struggle to read the <b<bold text> syntax though, and I suspect enough > |non-programmers have been exposed to HTML-like syntax in forum software, > |etc., that they to are used to <> balancing. Editors may also provide > |"matching bracket" functionality for <>, as with [], etc. Were syntaxes > |like > | > | Here is some <b:bold text>. > | Here is some <i:italic text>. > | Here is some <smallcaps:small cap text>. > | Here is <bold, size +2:bold and larger text> > | > |considered, with the first colon marking the separation? > | > | <b:Bold and <i:bold-italic>> text. > > Or plain SGML that i think could use <tagname/almost any text you > like/. I think plain SGML is still an interesting language, much > better than what XML made of it. And then i, for one, don't want > yet another so-called plain text markup language. There is rst, > asciidoc, markdown, whatever, a bit more taggy is perl's POD and > many more. I think pimping one of those as a base is more likely > to be useful. I had a time when i liked rst, but pimping POD is > possibly nicer given how rst looks if you start real work with > progamming stuff etc. And then a nicely reduced ROFF (TeX, too) > set of macros does look very clean! If it only could act as > a base for other document formats... > > Ciao, and have a nice weekend! > > --steffen >
