Re: [Boost-docs] How to start Quickbook lists items with a new paragraphs

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] How to start Quickbook lists items with a new paragraphs
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-01 17:50:21

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-docs-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-docs-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of
> Daniel James
> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 4:04 PM
> To: Discussion of Boost Documentation
> Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] How to start Quickbook lists items with a new paragraphs
> 
> On 1 November 2011 15:51, Paul A. Bristow <pbristow_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > I am getting a warning
> >
> > multiprecision.qbk:425: warning: line breaks generate invalid
> > boostbook (will only note first occurrence).
> 
> Quickbook doesn't support paragraphs in lists at the moment. There have been some hacks to do so
such
> as John's 'para' template in the maths documentation. Quickbook 1.6 should have explicit list
elements,
> which will allow you to do that. The following should work on trunk at the moment, all 1.6 things
are
> subject to approval.
> 
> [article Lists with paragraphs
> [quickbook 1.6]
> ]
> 
> [ordered_list
>     [
>         [* Bold text]
> 
>         Content
>     ]
>     [
>         [* Bold text]
> 
>     	Content
>     ]
> ]

OK, I've tried that and it is near to what I want (and seems a reasonable wish ;-)

Quickbook is 

[ordered_list
[ [/ 1st item]
[*Precision - Compile-time Versus Run-time.]

After consultation on the Boost list,
it was decided that the best compromise was to fix precision compile-time,
rather than allow the choice to be made at run-time.

A major factor was the sheer difficulty of achieving a run-time solution,
but also the risk of performance penalty, longer compile times,
risk of errors from complexity, greater difficulty of testing.
]

[ [/2nd item]
[*Choice of backend]
It was considered important to permit a choice of backend.
Although GMP/MPFR is the ['Gold Standard], the restricted licence terms make it
useless for any commerical applications, so it was deemed essential to provide
a Boost license backend, even if its performance was not quite as good.
]
] [/end of ordered_list]

What I get is

  1  Precision - Compile-time Versus Run-time.   << Bold as expected.
                                                                                     << There seems
two 'newlines' here - one more than I wanted? (or got with [br])
    After consultation on the Boost list, it was decided that the best compromise was to fix
precision compile-time, rather than allow the choice to be made at run-time.
<<  There also seems to be two 'newlines' here - I'd just like to be sure that "A major factor .."
starts a new paragraph.
    A major factor was the sheer difficulty of achieving a run-time solution, but also the risk of
performance penalty, longer compile times, risk of errors from complexity, greater difficulty of
testing.

 2  * Choice of backend* It was considered important to permit a choice of backend. Although
GMP/MPFR is the Gold Standard, the restricted licence terms make it useless for any commercial
applications, so it was deemed essential to provide a Boost license backend, even if its performance
was not quite as good.

What I'd like is

  1  *Precision - Compile-time Versus Run-time*.  << Bold as expected.
    After consultation on the Boost list, it was decided that the best compromise was to fix
precision compile-time, rather than allow the choice to be made at run-time.
    A major factor was the sheer difficulty of achieving a run-time solution, but also the risk of
performance penalty, longer compile times, risk of errors from complexity, greater difficulty of
testing.

 2   *Choice of backend*  It was considered important to permit a choice of backend. Although
GMP/MPFR is the Gold Standard, the restricted licence terms make it useless for any commercial
applications, so it was deemed essential to provide a Boost license backend, even if its performance
was not quite as good.

Obviously I don't fully understand how it works internally (or externally in BoostBook) but it seems
to making life difficult for the user!

Is the problem the spacing in the 'definition' of HTML para?

Or should I just stop fighting it?

Thanks.

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow,
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]  07714330204
pbristow_at_[hidden]