(missing)
(missing)
(missing)
Re: Proposal to add HTML class attributes to SRFIs to aid machine-parsing Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (06 Mar 2019 10:12 UTC)
Re: Proposal to add HTML class attributes to SRFIs to aid machine-parsing Lassi Kortela (06 Mar 2019 14:50 UTC)

Re: Proposal to add HTML class attributes to SRFIs to aid machine-parsing Lassi Kortela 06 Mar 2019 14:50 UTC

> It's possible to use even simpler markup by relying on context to
> understand that arguments are arguments:
>
> <div class="proc def">
>    <span>make-array</span>
>    <var>interval</var>
>    <var>getter</var>
>    <var class="opt">setter</var></div>
>
> Bold text, parentheses, square brackets, and a "procedure: " prefix can
> be added by CSS, if desired.

This would be ideal :) "Every <var> inside a procdef is an argument to
the procedure."

For new SRFIs with a rigid HTML structure this would definitely be the
way to go. But changing old SRFIs to conform may be difficult due to the
diversity of markup conventions. Classes are definitely a bit of a
band-aid solution impelled by legacy markup.

Should we try to get some statistics on how many old SRFIs could be
easily converted to this markup?