| Re: [asciidoc-wg] Intro + feedback |
Hi all, On 2020-03-26 5:04 p.m., Philippe Proulx wrote: > Hello there! > > I just subscribed to this mailing list. (snip) > I was about to give some more detailed feedback about the AsciiDoc(tor) > format, but I see Sarah White already wrote (10 March): > >> I submitted the draft proposal for the AsciiDoc specification, TCK, >> and related artifacts to the EMO (Eclipse Management Organization) on >> Thursday (03/05). > > My question is: is it too late to indicate which parts of the AsciiDoc > format I'd like to see changed/improved? I wanted to reiterate this request. A friendly mark-up anchored to an industrial-strength document model is AsciiDoc's killer feature for me. I'm interested in reducing the impedance mismatches between AsciiDoc and DocBook. For example, while DocBook supports multiple entries in the "revision history" (revhistory) block, AsciiDoc can only express the first one. Sarah and Dan, thank you! I expect you're busy, and I'm eager to hear how outsiders can engage in the WG without burdening you further. I'm eager to see the artifacts submitted to the EMO as soon as you are ready to share them. best, Graeme
Attachment:
pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys