[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Text Markup Part II

• From: Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie>
• To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
• Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:13:13 +0000

On 20/01/12 20:28, John Cowan wrote:
> Peter Flynn scripsit:
>
>>> A) "Marking up bits of text where needed"
>>> And
>>> B) "A full text markup vocabulary for encoding an entire document"
>>
>> I'm finding it hard to see a use case for (A) at all. I'm not aware of
>> it ever being done.
>
> In LMNL, the tags express not containment but ranges, which may or may
> not overlap.  There is no requirement to tag the whole-document range.
> Indeed, as soon as you have escaped the LMNL markup start characters
> [ and {, any plain-text document becomes well-formed LMNL.

Thank you for reminding me -- a good example. I don't remember (and now 
cannot find, as most of the links there have broken over time) details 
of how LMNL announces its presence: is this assumed to be in the 
filetype, or is there a marker somewhere? Other than the simple presence 
of the markup characters themselves, which could arbitrarily occur in 
any type of document.

I was taking (A) to mean marking up a fragment inside a document 
*without* heralding the fact. I really don't see a use case for that, 
apart from providing for serendipitous discovery.

///Peter

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Text Markup Part II
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@calldei.com>
  • Re: Text Markup Part II
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>

• References:
  • Text Markup Part II
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@calldei.com>
  • Re: Text Markup Part II
    • From: Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie>
  • Re: Text Markup Part II
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>