Re: proposals for new XML

[Patrice Dumas]

On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:05:17PM +0000, Karl Berry wrote:
>     So no commandarg for +, ok?
> 
> I'm confused again.  I was thinking of commandarg="..." as the literal
> string given to @itemize, not anything parsed.  Otherwise, why have it
> in some cases (@minus) and not others (+)?

Because the case of @minus is a special case, the case of a @-command
which prototype is to have empty braces, like @minus{}, @bullet{} or 
similar on the @itemize line (with or without empty brace) and nothing
else on the line.  The Parser records it (since it has to determine that
this is really the case as the @-command can not have braces in that 
case).

In any other case, it cannot be known easily if it fits in an attribute.
Sure, if it is a '+' it fits, but it also fits if it is 
 @itemize @@
 @itemize +@@
but not for 
 @itemize @click{}
and I'd prefer not to have to parse the tree to know if this is such a 
case or not, and therefore avoid using an attribute.

-- 
Pat