> > The outstanding issue is: how could we name this > role? Sadly, ``:var:`` is already taken in the C and > C++ domains. ``:meta:`` is conceivable, but ``.. meta::`` > is a standard docutils directive, so it might be > confusing. I'm a bit out of ideas ... ``:placeholder:`` > maybe? >
If we're talking about a role for marking a variable or formal parameter name, :var:`*varname*` would be the right thing. But that's not what I'd call metasyntactic. If we're talking about something that really is metasyntactic, I'd be inclined to use something like :metavar:`*metavarname*`; it's pretty clear. But it probably belongs outside a domain, unless we want a domain for meta-conceptual bits: :meta:var:`*metavarname*`. -Fred -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sphinx-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sphinx-users/814ae21d-e70f-4039-b72e-c72c3b31be10n%40googlegroups.com.
