💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 005654.gmi captured on 2024-02-05 at 11:08:29. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
u9000 (Nine) u9000 at posteo.mx
Fri Feb 26 00:16:45 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On Thu, 2021-02-25 at 17:25 -0500, Sean Conner wrote:
It was thus said that the Great Bradley D. Thornton once stated:
On 2/25/2021 11:42 AM, Devin Prater wrote:
But then we get to preformatted blocks, and the dreaded Ascii
graphics. This is what I’ve always disliked about all plain text
mediums. Sure, it’s wrapped up in a pretty block, but as I’ll
discuss in a moment, that isn’t necessarily helpful.
I solicited a response from him but to date have heard absolutely
nothing from him. But here's what I did in the meantime.
```ASCII-art blah blah blah
content
content
content
```
I might suggest something like:
preformat = "```" [ [WSP] tag ] [ [WSP] alt-text] end-of-line
tag = '@art' / '@code' / '@data' / '@poem'
Maybe 'poem' should be 'poetry'; it's the only tag there which isquantity-specific. What do you guys think about this/the name(s)?
The '@tag' format marks out the tag, which I expressly limited to
just four categories for simplicity---one to mark ASCII (or maybe UTF-
8?) art, one for code samples, one for tabular data and one for
poetry. It's not mandatory, but it could help a client decide how to
handle the block.
I like the idea of further giving control over how content is displayedto clients instead of authors, however I think '@tag' might make adocument look very marked up in clients that don't remove the '```'.Perhaps '#tag' would look more normal?