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

[Frank LENORMAND]

On Mon Jun  8 10:22:33 2020, solderpunk wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 06:40:33PM -0400, Matthew Graybosch wrote:
> > I use asterisks inline for emphasis because that's a habit I've taken
> > from Markdown. My understanding of the standard was that the
> > behavior of inline asterisks (as opposed to asterisks at at the
> > beginning of a line to indicate a list item) is undefined and thus
> > client-dependent.
> > 
> > If the client uses them to denote *italics* and **bold**, great. If
> > not, I figure that readers familiar with plain-text email will still
> > interpret such text accordingly. Either way, as a self-hosting writer,
> > my job is to make the words and reliably serve them. What happens on
> > the client side is none of my business.
> > 
> > My understanding of the new changes to the standard is that the
> > behavior of inline asterisks is *still* client-dependent. That's fine
> > with me as a writer, TBH. If I wanted the illusion of precise control
> > over how clients render my documents, I'd go back to HTML/CSS--or
> > pick up groff again and just post PDFs. :)
> 
> This is all correct - technically *and* ideologically. :)

How are clients supposed to render words that are censored with asterisks?

Consider:

*ssh*le

The spec was modified to make sure clients understand the above isn't a
bullet item. Therefore writers are indirectly allowed by the standard to
influence the rendering, otherwise there would have been no conflict to
address in the first place.

So clients will render the above as "sshle", which isn't the writer's
intent. Only a matter of time until you see writers start escaping asterisks
in texts:

\*ssh\*le

And now, because you've put the responsibility of dealing with a concept
that the standard implies is allowed, some clients will render the above
either verbatim, or have a concept of escaping, the latter being against
the philosophy of Gemini, from what I gather.

You can't pretend clients will fill-in the gaps by themselves if the
specification isn't pedantic about it.

Regards,
-- 
Frank LENORMAND