3 ms·
Oh, I skipped that paragraph. Oy, sorry. I think the text format for interleaving source and commentary needs its own discussion somewhere, and probably a sta
by cryptonector 8y ago
Oh, I skipped that paragraph. Oy, sorry. I think the text format for interleaving source and commentary needs its own discussion somewhere, and probably a standalone repository separate from implementation (and some day preferably too, an RFC, or at least a MIME type registration).
I've looked at the examples you linked, and... I like that the review format for review authoring is just plain trivial. Not sure how it works with quote trimming... I'm not sure I like the output format, but I'll go think about it.
- Sir_Cmpwn 8y agoThe output format is just a means of testing the library, not the final user-facing form this will take.
- emersion 8y ago>I think the text format for interleaving source and commentary needs its own discussion somewhere, and probably a standalone repository separate from implementation (and some day preferably too, an RFC, or at least a MIME type registration). Yeah, this library just parses email threads and the goal isn't to define a new format. This particular output format is just for debugging and unit testing, it's not meant to e actually used as is. The library user just gets a tree of text fragments with metadata, it's up to him how the output will look like.