On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Ville M. Vainio <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 9:33 PM, Edward K. Ream <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > 1. Remove the section name and underlining from the body text of the > > imported nodes. As we can see from today's work, this step is not > > essential. But it is extremely useful: it means the user can change > > the level of a section simply by moving it around the @auto tree. As > > It also means user can create new sections without entering the > heading twice (once on the headline, other time on the beginning of > body). Also, user should not need to remember / know ahead what kind > of underlining he should use. Yes. This is definitely going to happen. > > > Note that you will also need to get rid of 'foo declarations' node; > perhaps by creating some kind of '@rst-no-headline preamble' node. Exactly. There appears to be a bug related to this, but it will be fixed today. > > > part of this step, the @auto code will remember (actually already > > remembers) the underlining in a uA. > > Enough about this has been said in other posts on my part ;-). Certainly the first step will be to use the uA. I won't do @ua unless it becomes necessary later. > > So substantial work remains. However, today's work makes clearer what > > needs to be done, which is important in a project as picky as this > > one. > > Yeah, and we finally got our hands on it to test it out :-). Patience, my sweets. Almost all the "hard" work is already done. What remains are the details that will make everything work smoothly. Here is the relevant to-do list: # Why does this work? Why is it [the wrapped call to writeTree] not looking for an @rst node? # To do: init underlining characters. # To do: suppress .. rst command line at start of file. # To do: ignore standard Leo directives in root node. # To do: over/underline characters for top-level sections. # To do: @rst-no-head x node writes x. Some of this is just setting ivars before calling writeTree. As with the rst import code, some hacks may be needed to writeTree and its helpers as special cases to distinguish between writing and @rst tree (the present code) and writing an @auto-rst tree (the desired code). BTW, I am still dithering about how to indicate that an @auto tree is to be treated as containing rST code. The present convention (all .txt files are rST files) is ok for testing, but my feeling is that it may be a bit too clever. @auto aTextFile.txt should just work. My best guess is that maybe Leo should support @auto-x for any language specifier x. > > This has a big promise for everybody that thought rst3 was too > involved - once this is working, there is pretty much nothing > "special" you need to know about the mechanics (rst options / > whatever), as long as you can enter @auto ~/doc/design.txt :-). Yes. I hope to have something to show today. The to-do list above isn't all that hard. Edward --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
