Re: [Boost-users] really dumb question about quickbook

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] really dumb question about quickbook
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-04-21 13:09:40

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost-users [mailto:boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Daniel James via Boost-users
> Sent: 21 April 2017 13:24
> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
> Cc: Daniel James
> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] really dumb question about quickbook
> 
> On 21 April 2017 at 12:10, Paul A. Bristow via Boost-users
> <boost-users_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> From: Daniel James via Boost-users
> >>
> >> It also wouldn't be too
> >> hard to let you add an id to 'endsect', and check that it matches the
> >> initial 'section', e.g. the would be an error:
> 
> s/the/this/
> 
> >>
> >>     [section:some Something]
> >>
> >>     [endsect:something]
> >
> > I think perhaps that I'd prefer to use the id rather than full title:
> 
> That was meant to illustrate an error - it's an error because it
> doesn't match the id.

Well that's all right then ;-)

(Note to self: Always good to read *exactly* what was written).
 
> > From an writing point of view, it would be easiest to be able to copy and paste the whole item
> >
> > [section:some Further info on Something Complicated]
> >
> > and edit to
> >
> > [endsect:some Further info on Something Complicated]
> 
> I'm not keen on that, it would be out of date if the section title
> changed. Also would confuse people if there's text that's just
> ignored.

Agreed.

Paul