On Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 06:51:21PM +0000, Peter Schneider-Kamp wrote: > I have put up the PEPs on http://python.sourceforge.net/peps/ > 1) Is that okay? No one cried out aloud and I got some agreement. I don't see why not. It certainly seems the right place for it ! And it's not like they were a corporate secret before. > 2) Should I put a link from http://python.sourceforge.net ? I'd say so, yeah. > 3) What about making those PEPs xhtml (or something like that)? > Pros: > - links from pep-000.txt > - links from the other peps > Cons: > - harder to read in checkins > - harder to edit > (maybe we could use as little markup as possible?) Definate -1 from here. I like plaintext. It also works just fine for RFCs. I don't mind if the reference section (which should be the only place that contains URIs ;) is written in a markup language to facilitate HTMLization, or maybe just straight HTML, but I don't feel like escaping all those '>'s in there. However, if they can be converted to HTML automatically, based on minor clues and/or whitespace-layout, fine by me ;) I wouldn't mind adding things like paragraph markers and such, I just dont like to edit HTML newer than 1.1 ;P -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4