[ruby-talk:00912] Re: RDtool-0.5.0

In message <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] writes:

> > Then we can write `((<Foo::Quux>))' and `((<Bar::Quux>))' to
> > distinguish each other, if tools permit.
> > 
> > I think the usage of operator `::' is enough similar to the way
> > known among ruby users, in this case :-)
> 
> There are two problem.
>   (1) How about DescList items? 

Same method works fine.


>   (2) "::" will be used often in Headline and DescList item, because
>       somebody will write references, so they choose "Class::Const"
>       as title of Headline.

Well, `::' is merely one of candidates.  However some kind of
hieralchical naming/referencing scheme should be supported to avoid
conflict between anchors.  Otherwise we cannot apply RD to long
documents which contain a number of similar format parts, such as
manuals of class library or OO frame work.

.... But user level efforts are always available. Writers can give
unique hieralchical name to chapters, sections, DescList items and
so.  Uh hum. It may be true, but I dislike such a way.

# Hmm.... unfamiliar language make me serious.... :-P


-- 
[e-mail]                               November 7, 1999
Every body's business is nobody's business.