[SPEC-CHANGE] lang parameter, minor line type changes, clarifications...

[Frank LENORMAND]

On Sun Jun  7 23:10:49 2020, solderpunk wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:38:04PM +0300, Frank LENORMAND wrote:
> > This amendment that prevents conflicts between list items and
> > *emphasised text* indirectly acknowledges that clients may not
> > render *emphasised text* verbatim.
> > 
> > Writers are no longer ensured by the standard that their text surrounded with
> > asterisks will not be decorated by the client, by extension.
> 
> Writers were *never* assured by the standard that text surrounded with
> asterisks would not be decorated by the client!
> 
> Clients that want to do that can, but it's strictly an optional extra
> out-of-spec nicety.  If anybody wants to do this, the onus is on them to
> do is smartly enough that it doesn't interfere with the specced use of
> asterisks for line items.  If they mess that up, presumably their users
> will move to an either less ambitious or better written client which
> doesn't mangle things.

The adjustment made to the bullet item format is an admission that in-line
formatting text is a thing. Writers MAY de-facto influence rendering,
otherwise you wouldn't have needed to make the amendment.

Before, writers could not reproach the clients' behaviour w.r.t to
interpreting asterisks, because nothing in the specification hinted that
it was acknowledged by the standard.

Now, clients MAY highlight \*\S.*\* patterns. The specification was amended
to make sure no ambiguous cases occur with bullet item lines.

Which means that clients who do choose to implement emphasising will be
asked for a way NOT to emphasise ALL such patterns, because the specification
never implied that was a thing, originally. But they are left with a
gaping hole, in the current state of the specification.

It follows that there should be a way for writers to escape asterisks around
words, in non pre-formatted blocks.

Regards,
-- 
Frank LENORMAND