On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 8:12 PM Per Bothner <xxxxxx@bothner.com> wrote:
> > (D)  procedure or syntax definition in a way that is machine readable
> > and from which "signatures" could be extracted;
> > [and here is where our differences lie;  you want to use HTML to mark
> > them, and I say it is overkill and should be "moved" to a dedicated
> > file or section, not necessarily part of the actual SRFI document;]
>
> Besides extracting meta-data into an index, we want to be able to link
> from the index to the location in the specification, marked by an id attribute.

This is caught in my (C) meta-data "level" which is exactly for this
purpose, that of indexing and back-referencing.

> Plus you want to
> mark up the definition for styling purposes anyway.  So just use the html
> file as the canonical location of the meta-data.

As said earlier I don't think it is feasible to extract any (complete
and useful) data from the definition styling.  (This is why I proposed
a separate specification based on S-expressions.)

Ciprian.