[Doc-SIG] Formalizing StructuredText (yeh!)

[Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)]

Edward D. Loper wrote:
> I added a page to Zope (under CurrentIssues), and I'll try to actually
> put more content there when I can. :)

Thanks

> I guess it depends on how much the implementations diverge from
> the intensions..

My aim is to make the documentation and implementation fit. This isn't
as dishonest as it sounds, because I have found that only by *doing* the
implementation does one discover all of the implications of the form of
ST one has chosen, and it's only fair to then document them...

>  I've been writing a large test set, and plan to
> post a link to it, and to the results of running STminus on it,
> later today.. (still needs a little more work).

Great.

> At that point, I'm
> hoping we can get a better idea of whether STNG and STpy really
> act like STminus.  (My guess is that most differences are
> unintentional ones)

I agree.

As you may have gathered, there *should* be a docutils 0.0.5, or maybe
even 0.1alpha,
soon, but unfortunately not this week, because of PEP writing, etc. So
it may be worth waiting on that before testing docutils (but then again,
maybe not).

> Definitely, since STminus is implemented directly from its formal
> definition.

I like that in a tool.

> Well, I'm hoping that all 3 at least have well-defined results *where
> they do define the results*.  I certainly hope that STNG will only
> give "unexpected results" for a small subclass of strings.. :)

There's unexpected (oh - I didn't want it to do that) and unexpected
(ah - I see that that *does* follow from what I asked it to do -
interesting).

<<<long explanation of why I'm not writing productions in EBNF for a
living!>>>

No, I defer to your expertise - I need to read what you wrote in more
detail, but the case is compelling, so I leave it to you.

> I tried to make all of my productions correspond to their actual
> entities..  So you shouldn't need to do (much) postprocessing on
> the output of STminus.  For example, the Paragraph production
> should give an entire paragraph, not just its first line.  I think
> I may add ULItem, OLItem, and DLItem productions for similar
> reasons (without changing the language defined by the productions)

OK - I see. That *is* a good reason.

> Thanks!  You've done some impressive work, yourself.

Hmm - no, what I'm doing is much simpler, in basis - if I had real time
for it it wouldn't take more than a couple of weeks, and there's nothing
complicated in there.

Anyway, so long as we're both having (some sort of) fun!

Tibs

--
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)      http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/
"How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive
continuity of ducks." - Dorothy L. Sayers, "Gaudy Night"
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)