---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>
Date: Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: discussion about standard SRFI markup
To: Arthur A. Gleckler <xxxxxx@speechcode.com>
Cc: Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@gmail.com>, Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>, Per Bothner <xxxxxx@bothner.com>, SRFI Editors <xxxxxx@srfi.schemers.org>


I write most SRFIs in Markdown and then convert to HTML, but in other cases I take existing SRFIs such as SRFI 1 and heavily modify them.  I wrote TagSoup, a Java program that converts arbitrary HTML to well-formed XML, so converting to XHTML would be easy, and I could do that conversion in a big batch.

Overall though I would prefer minimal modification with just a few classes, enough to make indexing straightforward, rather than a comprehensive reformatting effort.  I could easily add class attributes by hand after HTML conversion.  In any case I only convert once and then abandon the Markdown.

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:13 PM Arthur A. Gleckler <xxxxxx@speechcode.com> wrote:
Hello, recent SRFI authors.  I would like to encourage you to participate in a recent discussion on srfi-discuss about simple proposed changes to SRFI HTML markup.  The idea is to make it possible to index all symbols defined in SRFIs automatically, but without requiring much (or even any, depending on the proposal) additional effort by authors:


It would be fantastic to be able to extract detailed information, e.g. procedure and macro signatures, from SRFIs automatically.