On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 18:55, Daniel Burrows wrote: > That might be true, but I would like to see language such as "best > package for foo" explicitly deprecated in the guide. I've even written > such stuff myself, back before I realized what the problems were. > (hopefully there isn't anything like that left in my packages :) )
Ok, done. > On an unrelated topic, it would be nice if the description format > allowed whitespace to be collapsed/expanded on wordwrapped lines. The last > time I checked, it seemed to at least imply that whitespace was sancrosact, > and I found several packages that relied on this in their description. > (sorry, I don't remember which) I think this is hard to without switching to a format which allows us to include more metadata (like XML). So we can explicitly use stuff like <ul> and <li> for lists, instead of relying on ASCII renderings. That way we can safely word-wrap the description, instead of just treating it as the equivalent of <pre>.