[DOC-SIG] Re: [PSA MEMBERS] [XML] Notes on the Tutorial's markup

[Guido van Rossum]

> I think that when push comes to shove, whoever has to type this stuff
> should vote in favour of SGML. XML means a <EMPH>lot</EMPH> of extra
> typing, and SGML offers a <EMPH/lot/ of <>short cuts</>.

Let me request a reality check here, before you guys get all carried
away.

Either choice sounds really bad to me.  I've come to really hate the
idea of having to type raw SGML.  For me, SGML is great as an
intermediate format -- I can generate it and I can parse it.  But I
don't want to type it.  It sounds like XML is no better.

There is an existing standard for doc strings (although almost nobody
uses it), I believe it's called "stext", which minimizes markup.  For
me, personally, doc strings are usually just specialized comments, and
the more markup they contain, the less readable they are.  I don't
like to read raw HTML, and expect that raw XML would be just as bad.

Sorry, just my two pennies,

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)


_______________
DOC-SIG  - SIG for the Python Documentation Project

send messages to: doc-sig@python.org
administrivia to: doc-sig-request@python.org
_______________