IMHO, the indenting hassle is one of the best features of "classic" STX. It's a pain to line things up but it does make for very readable source documents. I think STX-NG is a little better than ReST for constructing readable source docs; especially if they are long, like chapters of a book due to this indenting. I would agree that if the source doc is less important than its rendering to HTML (or another format), reST has STX beat in many areas. ReST also has an enormous amount of specification and documentation, which counts for a lot. Personally, I will likely stick with STX-NG as well (at least for the foreseeable future), because I am comfortable with its weaknesses and I also have a fairly large corpus of documents that are written in STX and there has not yet been written (that I know of) a classic-STX-to-reST converter. - C ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simon Michael" <simon@joyful.com> To: <zope-dev@zope.org> Cc: "David Goodger" <goodger@users.sourceforge.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:24 PM Subject: [Zope-dev] Re: Future of StructuredText
Andreas Jung wrote:
I would be fine to have reStructuredText inside the Zope core (for 2.7) and to deprecate the current StructuredText in the long run.
My two cents - there are some things in rST I would like to have but I think it has gone too far with it's rules. If I had to choose one or the other right now I would stick with stxNG for simplicity and because it doesn't dictate things unnecessarily.
I think the number one problem with stx for most people is the indenting hassle.
These markups are evolving and I don't think we've seen the best designs yet. http://repose.cx/emacs/wiki/wikimarkup.pt is another which feels good to me, check it out.
-Simon
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )