Aren't we down a rat hole atm about what elements, tags, features, etc, and the best way to go about handling existing and future docs? :)

I would imagine that a very simple and clear semi-markup language would actually make it easier to submit, edit, and review srfis - html is a lot of extra writing for low value IF the goal is something machine parsable and semantic. If the goal is, as it has been, human review and understanding, then perhaps it would make sense if it was easier on the authors and readers, otherwise it should be relegated to a personal project and not a group discussion.

-elf

On March 11, 2019 5:12:21 AM GMT+02:00, "Arthur A. Gleckler" <xxxxxx@speechcode.com> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 8:06 PM elf <xxxxxx@ephemeral.net> wrote:
This may be a stupid suggestion, but perhaps it would be easier to write the srfis in a specialised markup format, and then generate both the docs and html/xhtml from that? 

It's not a stupid suggestion at all.  However, I (the editor) am very nervous about making any fundamental changes to the process that has served for twenty years, and HTML has been a requirement from the beginning.  More practically, I'm sensitive to any proposal that adds work for authors or that might send us down a rat hole arguing about exactly the right formatting language.  That could turn away authors who might otherwise be willing to contribute great SRFIs.

It's a really delicate technical-social balance.