> > > Jan propses to use conventions like 'xxx' for variable names
> > > and "zzz" for emphasis (I think).
> > > other lightweight emphasis conventions like _yyy_ or *zzz*
> >
> > one that springs to mind for me is @Name@, but I don't
> really mind as
> > long as it's non-ambiguous and doesn't cause parsing headaches.
>
> Would there be any difficulty in permitting _all_ of the common ASCII
> emphasis styles? For instance, "name" and _name_ could be italic,
> *name* could be bold, 'name' and @name@ could be hyperlinked bold,
> or some such. In fact, it wouldn't really matter which style was
> rendered in what manner - different tools could do it differently if
> they chose. (Ok, except maybe hyperlinking would have to be defined.)
The real problem is that you need at least three forms of hyperlinked
markup: eg, what should @ForeignPtr@ link to - the type constructor,
the constructor, or the module? I suppose there's always @...@, |...|,
<...>, <<...>>, etc.
Would this be too heavyweight: @module M@, @con C@, @class C@, @tycon
T@? Perhaps the keywords could be left out when the meaning is
non-ambiguous, as is usually the case with variable and function names.
Cheers,
Simon
