On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 1:48 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > waylan said: >> So, then, how do we interpret "do nothing". > > "nothing" is exactly as john put it in his e-mail: >> - one >> 2. two
Well, as any generated output (anything except raw html) should be valid html, at the least it would be wrapped in some container (could be a <p> or <div> or something). More realistically, as I understand how most of the parsers work, I would expect such a drastic interpretation of "do nothing" to be: <ul> <li>one 2. two</li> </ul> That is, the second line is simply seen as a continuation (another line) of the first list item as it does not start with indentation (indicating nesting) or a matching list item indicator (indicating another item of the same type). In other words, if the line does not start with the *same* list item type it is seen as a line of plain text - no different than: - foo bar We'll call this Option E. I'd argue that this would actually be a dumber parser than a true "do nothing" solution as the truly "do nothing" parser would need knowledge of, and code to test for the special case and act differently (as Yuri points out, that's ugly - I know I wouldn't want to write the parser for that), whereas option E just dumbs the parser down a little. This would also present an interesting solution to the "I want two or more consecutive, but different lists in my document" problem. Consider: 1. one 2. two * foo * bar - blah - baz No more of that "must use two blank lines between each list" monkey business that we've discussed before and no-one has bothered to implement. Which, btw, is another reason why I like C better than A. Either C or E works for me, but I'll settle with A as a lousy compromise seeing it already appears to have the popular vote. -- ---- Waylan Limberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
