You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As macros and attributes are separated from #38, now strong/weak carryover tag makes less sense.
Before both are macros modifying next element and the term "strong" and "weak" represents how large it's next element can be.
With #38, weak carryover tag is classified as an attribute, not a macro.
And the next element rule is also not true so the weak carryover tag is not weak anymore.
Weak carryover tag is not weak nor elementary version of strong carryover tags.
Idea
Change this:
+color red
+background blue
paragraph text
to this:
#(color red;
background blue)
paragraph text
#(color red)
#(background blue)
this is also possible
Pros
Reduce the number of special prefix tokens that user have to remember
Generalized way to put attributes (carryover tags, detached modifier extensions, attached modifier extensions share same syntax)
User can choose the single-line / multi-line style for block attributes
#(color red; background blue; foo; bar)
paragraph text
#(color red;
background blue;
foo;
bar)
paragraph text
smaller parser size (it won't be meaningful amount though)
Cons
This might be unnecessary breaking change to v1 spec.
Yes, this is a breaking change, but #38 is already a breaking change for weak carryover tags.
The weak carryover tag rule is already broken:
v1 spec:
+color red
- list item 1 (red)
- list item 2 (not red)
new spec:
+color red
- list item 1 (red)
- list item 2 (also red)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Original idea mentioned from this comment I wrote before.
As macros and attributes are separated from #38, now strong/weak carryover tag makes less sense.
Before both are macros modifying next element and the term "strong" and "weak" represents how large it's next element can be.
With #38, weak carryover tag is classified as an attribute, not a macro.
And the next element rule is also not true so the weak carryover tag is not weak anymore.
Weak carryover tag is not weak nor elementary version of strong carryover tags.
Idea
Change this:
to this:
Pros
Cons
Yes, this is a breaking change, but #38 is already a breaking change for weak carryover tags.
The weak carryover tag rule is already broken:
v1 spec:
new spec:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: