> But if this is to be the official documentation source, I'm a little > concerned about the lack of semantic cues. For example, in the snippet > above, the same markup is used for both the example and the sample > implementation; and the procedure signature is "weakly marked up" > using whitespace. Personally, I'd like to see a more explict, semantic > markup, particularly for key elements like procedure signatures. (I > assume the syntax is extensible, maybe Alejandro could add some tags > to address this.)
I will certainly add some tags. I absolutely agree with you. I'll probably use a format based in tags (ala XML), something along the lines of: ==== List length <procedure>(length l)</procedure> Returns the length of list {{l}}. <examples> (length '(1 . 2)) => 1.5 </examples> I'll probably do this by making it possible to define wiki-specific tags whose definition is a Scheme function mapping the text between the opening and closing tag to “lower-level” wiki language. These definitions will probably live in a file on the wiki and get executed by the sandbox egg. What tags would you suggest? Examples, procedure, syntax? Hmm. Thanks for your suggestions, Graham. You've raised a very valid point. Alejo. http://azul.freaks-unidos.net/ _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users