[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks
From: |
Suhail Singh |
Subject: |
Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Feb 2024 18:33:44 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:
> As I already said, in my local branch I have both elements created,
> based on the same syntax:
>
> - language block: :lang{text}
>
> - special block &type{text}
Why not &:lang{text} (and/or &:lang[options]{text}) instead? In fact,
it might help (in that it may reduce the need for escaping within the
"text") if the syntax was &:type{text} with "lang" being one of the
possible type (as opposed to the type being ":lang").
--
Suhail
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, (continued)
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Samuel Wales, 2024/02/21
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Juan Manuel Macías, 2024/02/21
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Max Nikulin, 2024/02/28
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Juan Manuel Macías, 2024/02/28
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Max Nikulin, 2024/02/28
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Juan Manuel Macías, 2024/02/28
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Max Nikulin, 2024/02/29
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Juan Manuel Macías, 2024/02/29
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Max Nikulin, 2024/02/29
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks, Juan Manuel Macías, 2024/02/29
- Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks,
Suhail Singh <=