On Thursday, 22 February 2024 17:38:36 CET Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jean-Noël AVILA <jn.avila@xxxxxxx> writes: > > >> So, perhaps we do not have to do a lot of 'word' -> _word_ > >> replacements, hopefully? > > > ... At least, we > > should try to stick as much as possible to the common markup _ for emphasis. > > OK, that clears up my confusion. Thanks. > > We do not want to rely on an external party indefinitely maintaining > what they consider backward compatibility wart, so the mark-up migration > would need to happen before it becomes too late. > > > This would have the added benefit of differentiating single quotes from > > backticks, because single quotes would completely disappear in the end, except > > when a real single quote is needed. > > Given enough time, yes. Or we can actively disable AsciiDoctor's > compatibility mode and/or tweak asciidoc.conf to do the equivalent > for AsciiDoc, to start early. Until then, we cannot really use "a > real single quote", right? The logic for managing single quotes as markup is that there should be a word boundary at the quote <SPC>'<letter> for opening and <letter>'<SPC> for closing, whereas for "real single quote" there's no space. This rule is "natural" when writing in English and writers don't pay attention. > > > For the migration to "standard" asciidoc, I would also recommend using "=" > > prefix for titles instead of underlines which require changing two lines when > > modifying a title and are a pain for translators in languages with variable > > width characters. > > I personally strongly prefer the underline format because I care > about readability of sources, but that is just me. Is that also > getting deprecated? > The underline format is bound to be deprecated. Right now, Asciidoctor detects this formatting to infer a switch to compat-mode. That's why markup-quote works as expected with Asciidoctor in current documents. > Thanks. > >
