Loading... |
Reply to author |
Edit post |
Move post |
Delete this post |
Delete this post and replies |
Change post date |
Print post |
Permalink |
Raw mail |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
48 posts
|
I can write (if I am really stupid)
:amp: -frogs- and Derby{amp}Jones becomes Derby-frogs-Jones Is there a legitimate use for this, or should predefined attributes be made read-only? |
Loading... |
Reply to author |
Edit post |
Move post |
Delete this post |
Delete this post and replies |
Change post date |
Print post |
Permalink |
Raw mail |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Administrator
2681 posts
|
Rocky, At first glance, you might conclude that predefined attributes should be read only. But this flexibility is a key advantage of AsciiDoc. I'll explain why. AsciiDoc is all about keeping source and output/presentation separate. The predefined values carry with them a bias towards XML and XML-like output. It's these very attributes that need to be fined-tuned when creating other types of output, and one of the main reasons that they exist. In other words, they communicate an intent to create a glyph or series of characters without tying that content to a specific output format. That's exactly why they shouldn't be read only. However, we can say that you shouldn't be overridding them unless you know what you are doing. Obviously, changing `amp` to resolve to `frogs` doesn't make a whole lot of sense...unless of course "frogs" represents "ampersand" in the output format you are targeting. That may seem strange, but consider that the value for trademark in a manpage is \(tm. Who knows what the output format requires. -Dan On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:56 AM, rockyallen [via Asciidoctor :: Discussion] <[hidden email]> wrote: I can write (if I am really stupid) ... [show rest of quote] Dan Allen | @mojavelinux | http://google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen |
Loading... |
Reply to author |
Edit post |
Move post |
Delete this post |
Delete this post and replies |
Change post date |
Print post |
Permalink |
Raw mail |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Administrator
2681 posts
|
In reply to this post by rockyallen
To say it a lot simpler, it's an important abstraction. -Dan On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 6:53 PM, Dan Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
... [show rest of quote] Dan Allen | @mojavelinux | http://google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |