Re: Optional/mandatory whitespace in §5.5 Advanced line types

[Nathan Galt]

Ooh, good catch.

Agreed.

> On Sep 12, 2020, at 10:37 PM, Sandra Snan <sandra.snan at idiomdrottning.org> wrote:
> 
> I agree with mandatory whitespace except for when quoting empty lines.
> 
> Nathan Galt <mailinglists at ngalt.com> writes:
> 
>> Prior reading:
>> 
>> => https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/specification.html The Spec, §5.5 Advanced line types
>> 
>> I noticed that the spec has three different advanced line types and three different whitespace handling verbiages for each.
>> 
>> Heading lines: Start with 1–3 “#”, then optional whitespace.
>> List items: Start with “* “ (note the space!)
>> Quote lines: Start with “>” 
>> 
>> Shouldn’t these three have the same whitespace rules, with the same phrasing?
>> 
>> Here’s my argument for “mandatory whitespace for all” ([\t ]+):
>> 
>> - It lets authors write “#3. I like eggs.” without accidentally getting that line parsed as if it were a heading (we don’t have backslash escapes like Markdown does)
>> - It’s better for some emoticons that, um, might be out there that start with > or *
>> - “#Steak” looks like a hashtag, and I could see some fraction of authors writing “#blah” _meaning_ for it to be a tag
>> - We shouldn’t be worried about backcompat at v0.14.2. I don’t have much gemini text, but I’m the sort who would reformat his own non-conformant documents to match something like this.
>> 
>> - - - -
>> 
>> I could see myself wanting an H4-equivalent or higher, but I’m not certain this is _quite_ the right time to mention it. Also the current spec already seems to say that clients should parse “#### Eggs” as not-a-heading.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20200912/3e3c735c/attachment.htm>