From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0AC91F4D7 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2022 00:33:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="j/qX2fZv"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1376683AbiFHA2e (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2022 20:28:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53398 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1578347AbiFGXcC (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2022 19:32:02 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05C7C251026 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 15:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41B3318977E; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 18:02:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=+CTv+RUtAPH/OQ3Ly6Jd0oXJsyBkktqLOEOoqs G0x+8=; b=j/qX2fZv05FOsAkYkvDeN1GphZqE/kgdJ85/bOm2UCrHWTnMFzboTQ +mm1IAWliQdhg2oX+T6jfxqD3Gr/ZxAm/KYydKWwq3JCWthC7ufTw42FjU1yV2dq vgh8+dr5+D+aYsnqbajRYKdrpTYd2Otjw9EnEYwoIY/jHEtttNEG0= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39DD118977D; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 18:02:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.83.92.57]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2171A18977C; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 18:02:23 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Taylor Blau Cc: Abhradeep Chakraborty via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Vicent Marti , Kaartic Sivaraam , Derrick Stolee , Abhradeep Chakraborty Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] bitmap-format.txt: fix some formatting issues References: Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2022 15:02:22 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Taylor Blau's message of "Tue, 7 Jun 2022 16:51:37 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 824E2014-E6AD-11EC-A90F-C85A9F429DF0-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Taylor Blau writes: > Similarly, everything below the "A header appears at the beginning" > list item appears in a 
 element, so the rendered HTML looks more
> like plaintext to me.

True.  Unless we are going to revamp the text in some major way so
that we produce "true" HTML, not just the text source enclosed in a

 pair, I would think we are better off keeping it not
passed to AsciiDoc and leaving it in text format.  After all, modern
browsers, which I presume those who want HTML output files would
read them with, can display plain text files just fine, don't they?

> This isn't new from your patch, but I wonder if now is a good
> opportunity to make some light use of the formatting options that
> ASCIIDoc gives us to make the page read a little bit more easily when
> rendered as HTML.

There was some talk about asking those who are adept at website
engineering to work on git-scm.com; it may be a good starting point
to look at these text files that weren't originally written to be
given to AsciiDoc and convert them to be true AsciiDoc sources.

Thanks.