Re: Quickbook block element

On 10/22/2011 2:56 AM, Daniel James wrote:
> On 21 October 2011 16:52, Steven Watanabe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> AMDG
>>
>> On 10/21/2011 08:40 AM, John Maddock wrote:
>>>
>>> How about a "block-template" as well as a "template" ?
>>>
>>> I.e. templates are always expanded as phrases, and block-templates as
>>> blocks?
>>>
>>
>> The current rule is that a block template
>> has a new line after the argument list.
> 
> Confusingly, the 'block' element is different from a block template, a
> block template contains blocks and used to be treated as a phrase
> element while a 'block' element is contains a phrase but is treated as
> a block element. So they're sort of the opposite.
> 
> In quickbook, there are blocks containing blocks (eg. note), blocks
> containing a phrase (eg. headers), a phrase element containing blocks
> (footnote) and the normal phrase elements (such as bold). There's also
> the more complicated elements such as table, sect etc. So when
> implementing elements as templates, something a bit more sophisticated
> is needed.
> 
> I also don't want to have named 'block templates' for a few reasons.
> As I mentioned above, they're not what you expect block templates to
> be. I also want this to be usable outside of templates and I think
> it's a good idea to strongly associate it with its content. Also, I
> think that if we have alternative targets for quickbook, that'll
> probably require having different types of templates, so I don't want
> to get into that area just yet.
> 
> I thought of calling the element something like 'escapedblock' but
> that isn't strictly speaking correct, although I'm pretty sure escaped
> markup is its only use. Maybe it should be an error to use it without
> escaped markup?

Nod. This concept of blocks and phrases is all historical. The
need arose (IIRC) from constraining the grammar to not allow
HTML 'phrase' markups (Qbk started as a tool that generated html)
such as <EM> contain 'block' markups such as <P>. I somehow agree
with Steven that the distinction is quite fragile and should be
reviewed.

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boostpro.com
http://boost-spirit.com