Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: finding answers quickly

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Fri, 2004-10-01 at 07:51, Thomas Lord wrote:
>     > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> 
>     >     William> Have a look at http://docutils.sf.net,
> 
>     > This is the Python docutils that provides reStructuredText.
> 
>     > It's nice as far as it goes, and I use it myself.  But as Andrew
>     > Suffield pointed out, it's just POD by another name and syntax, and
>     > tla already has one of those (although it's currently rather hard to
>     > use since it requires systas scheme).  So that's three that have been
>     > mentioned.
> 
> I think of the screwy doc format used in libhackerlab and the tla
> tutorial a particularly interesting variation on the wiki-syntax
> theme:
> 
> It is *intended* to be a close-to-plain-text format, quite readable
> (and even hyperlinkable) in source form.   It is intended to have a 
> tasteful mix of structural (semantic) and presentation markups.
> It is intended to be relatively trivial to parse and process.  It is
> intended to have decent translations into HTML, TeX, and directly
> (i.e., not necessarily via TeX) to the printed page.
> 
> That particular wiki-like-language is, in my now several-years
> experience with it, very close, but not quite right.  It has a few,
> serious glitches.
> 
> At the same time, I've yet to see a competing language with similar
> goals that does better.
> 
> I don't think that the absense of a better example indicates that one
> can't be made.  Rather, I think it's just one of the many things on
> that very long list of not-very-difficult hacks that hasn't been done
> *yet*.
> 
> So, as I vaguely understand the original topic: i don't care what
> folks do with the wiki docs, of course (since it isn't my place to
> care about that) but, for internal-to-project documentation --- yes,
> we do have to move past the system currently used but as things stand,
> I'm in favor of a brief little side project to make something similar
> to what's currently used, but much better.

Has anyone seen (or rather used) http://www.antlr.org/TML/index.tml ?