NAME

kwidinput - selected messages from Perl6-language list

STATUS

To be considered as requirements documents at this stage...

FIRST TPF STAFF COMMENT

 From: Damian Conway
 To: perl6-language@perl.org
 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [RFC] A more extensible/flexible POD (ROUGH-DRAFT)]
 
 [No, I'm not back; I'm just passing by. But I feel that I need to
 comment on this whole issue]
 
 Even before Brian announced Kwid, I was privately suggesting to Larry
 that Markdown (http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/) was an
 excellent evolution of mark-up notations and might be well suited to
 Perl 6. At least...as a second allowable syntax.
 
 And, in my view, Kwid kicks Markdown's butt in terms of its
 suitability for Perl documentation. POD itself is brilliant and we
 should certainly not abandon it, but it's critical to remember that
 POD is just an *interface* (or B<interface>, if you prefer ;-) to
 Perl's built-in documentation systems. I strongly believe that Kwid
 is, for many purposes, a cleaner and less-intrusive interface, and I
 for one will be using it (even if I have to build a kwid2pod
 translator).
 
 But frankly, I'd rather just be able to write:
 
 =kwid
 
 in place of
 
 =pod
 
 within standard Perl 6.
 
 As for the larger issue of redoing pod, I've appended my notes on
 where the Design Team left their discussions when last we discussed
 it. This might spark some ideas (but note that I will not be able to
 respond to them any time soon -- alas, bread-winning must, for the
 moment, take precedence over most of my public activities).
 
 Damian
 
  -----cut----------cut----------cut----------cut----------cut-----
 
 There would be a single consistent rule that says that every POD block
 (except raw text blocks) has one of the following three equivalent
 syntactic forms:
 
      =begin  TYPE  OPTIONAL_MULTIWORD_LABEL_TO_END_OF_LINE
      BLOCK_CONTENTS_START_HERE_AND_CONTINUE_OVER_MULTIPLE_LINES_UNTIL...
      =end  TYPE  OPTIONAL_SAME_MULTIWORD_LABEL
 
 or:
 
      =for  TYPE  OPTIONAL_MULTIWORD_LABEL_TO_END_OF_LINE
      BLOCK_CONTENTS_START_HERE_AND_CONTINUE_OVER_MULTIPLE_LINES_UNTIL...
      <first whitespace-only line or next pod directive>
 
 or:
 
      =TYPE  BLOCK_CONTENTS_START_HERE_AND_CONTINUE_OVER_MULTIPLE_LINES_UNTIL...
      <first whitespace-only line or pod directive>
 
 For example:
 
      =begin table Table of Contents
          Constants           1
          Variables           10
          Subroutines         33
          Everything else     57
      =end table
 
      =begin list
      =begin item *
          Doh
      =end item
      =begin item *
          Ray
      =end item
      =begin item *
          Me
      =end item
      =end list
 
      =begin comment
          This is the most verbose way to write all this
      =end comment
 
 Or equivalently:
 
      =for table Table of Contents
          Constants           1
          Variables           10
          Subroutines         33
          Everything else     57
 
      =begin list
      =for item *
          Doh
 
      =for item *
          Ray
 
      =for item *
          Me
 
      =end list
 
      =for comment
          This is a less verbose way to write all this
 
 Or also equivalently:
 
      =for table Table of Contents
          Constants           1
          Variables           10
          Subroutines         33
          Everything else     57
 
      =for list
      =item * Doh
      =item * Ray
      =item * Me
 
      =comment This is the least verbose way to write all this
 
 
 POD formatters could then be simply and consistently implemented by
 inheriting from a standard Pod::Base class, which would provide a
 C<.parse_pod> method that sequentially extracts each block construct (from
 whichever of the three syntaxes), including raw text blocks (which are
 actually just unlabelled C<=for body> blocks), and raw code blocks
 (which are actually just unlabelled C<=for verbatim> blocks).
 
 C<.parse_pod> would be something like:
 
      multi method parse_pod ($self: Str $from_str) {
          # Get sequence of POD blocks to be parsed
          # Using standard rules...
          my @blocks = $self.extract_pod($from_str);
 
          # Dispatch each block to be processed by the
          # appropriate method...
          for @blocks -> $block {
              my ($type, $label, $contents) = $block<type label contents>;
              $self.$type($label, $contents);
          }
      }
 
 When each C<.$type()> method is called, both the label and contents would
 passed as simple strings (either of which might, of course, be empty if
 the corresponding component had been omitted from the block). The
 (multi)method thus selected would then be responsible for
 formatting/processing/whatevering the label and contents passed to it:
 
      method head1 ($label, $contents) {...}
      method head2 ($label, $contents) {...}
 
      method list ($label, $contents) {...}
 
      method item ($label, $contents) {...}
 
      # etc.
 
 Note that under this scheme the Perl5 syntax for:
 
      =head1 Title here
 
      =head2 Subtitle here
 
      =head3 Subsubtitle here
 
      =head4 Subsubsubsubtitle here
 
      =item  Bullet  Item text
 
      =cut
 
      =pod
 
 would mostly all continue to work (though, of course, C<=cut> and
 C<=pod> would actually be dealt with directly within C<.extract_from>).
 
 The most noticable change would be that something like:
 
      =item Bullet
 
      Text of item here
 
 would now have to be written either as:
 
      =item  Bullet  Text of item here
 
 (an improvement, I suspect), or as:
 
      =item  Bullet
      Text of item here
 
 (assuming the .item() method was clever enough to remove leading
   whitespace from the contents), or as:
 
      =for item  Bullet
      Text of item here
 
 or:
 
      =begin item Bullet
 
      Text of item here
 
      =end text
 
 
 Of course:
 
      =over 4
      ...
      =back
 
 would no longer work; they would have to be written something like:
 
      =begin indent 4
      ...
      =end indent
 
 Or better still, removed entirely and replaced with:
 
      =begin list
      ...
      =end list
 
 At the moment they're odd-fish: not a mark-up block, but a layout block.
 And hence intrinsically evil. ;-)
 
 And if you wanted to *change* how POD is processed by perl6, you'd just
 use a C<=use> directive to install your own class:
 
      =use Pod::Quibble
 
 as the POD handler. That class would probably be derived from Pod::Base
 with some polymorphic or multimorphic adjustments to one or more of
 C<.extract_pod>, C<.parse_pod>, or the various C<.head1>, C<.head2>,
 C<.list>, C<.item>, C<.table>, C<.data>, etc. methods.
 
 
 We also intend to unify __DATA__ and POD, and make both accessible (at
 compile time and run time) to the program.
 
 The single Perl 5 __DATA__ section would become:
 
      =begin data
      ...
      =end data
 
 and you could define multiple separate data sections (a la Inline::Files)
 with:
 
      =begin data LABEL1
      ...
      =end data
 
      =begin data LABEL2
      ...
      =end data
 
      # etc.
 
 Of course, under the synactic equivalences described above,
 you could also write those as:
 
      =for data LABEL1
      ...
 
      =for data LABEL2
      ...
 
      # etc.
 
 or:
 
      =data LABEL1 ...
 
      =data LABEL2 ...
 
      # etc.
 
 These would simply be parsed by the standard Pod::Inline class (or whatever
 it's eventually called), running as part of the perl6 parser.
 
 Perl 6 would provide two standard file-scoped variables named
 C<%=POD> and C<%=DATA>, which would provide access to all the file-
 related metadata:
 
      %=POD                 --> structured POD object
 
      %=DATA                --> structured DATA object (part of %=POD)
 
 The "structured POD object" is an object that provides both sequential
 and named access (lazily, of course!) to the overall POD structure of the
 current file (including any =data sections):
 
      %=POD<head1>          --> Array of POD objects representing C<=head1>
                                chunks
 
      %=POD<head1>[$n]      --> structured POD object representing Nth
                                C<=head1> chunk
 
      %=POD[$n]             --> structured POD object representing Nth
                                C<=head1> chunk (shorthand)
 
      %=POD[$n].text        --> Text of Nth C<=head1> directive
 
      %=POD[$n].loc         --> Line range of the Nth C<=head1> directive
 
 
      %=POD<head1>[$n]<head2>[$m]
                            --> structured POD object representing the
                                Mth C<=head2> chunk within Nth C<=head1>
                                section
 
      %=POD[$n]<head2>[$m]  --> structured POD object representing the
                                Mth C<=head2> chunk within Nth C<=head1>
                                section (shorthand)
 
      %=POD[$n][$m]         --> structured POD object representing the
                                Mth C<=head2> chunk within Nth C<=head1>
                                section (evenshorterhand)
 
 
      %=POD<head2>          --> Array of POD objects representing C<=head2>
                                chunks (from all C<=head1> sections)
 
 
      %=POD<table>[$t]      --> POD object representing the Tth C<=table>
 
      %=POD<table>[$t].text --> Caption of the Tth C<=table>
 
      %=POD<table>[$t].loc  --> Line range of the Tth C<=table>
 
      %=POD<table>[$t][$r]  --> The Rth row of the Tth C<=table>
 
 
      %=POD<html>[$h]       --> POD object representing the Hth C<=begin html>
                                section
 
      etc.
 
 Meanwhile, the "DATA hash" would contain the (lazily extracted!) text of
 just the C<=data> sections, with the keys of the hash being the names of
 the sections. The value of each entry would be an object with stringific
 and arrayific overloadings:
 
      %=DATA                --> Hash of objects representing C<=data>
                                sections, keyed by name
 
      %=DATA<LABEL1>        --> Data object representing all C<=data LABEL1>
                                sections
 
      ~ %=DATA<LABEL1>      --> Concatenated text from all C<=data LABEL1>
                                sections
 
      %=DATA<LABEL1>[$n]    --> Text from only the Nth C<=data LABEL1>
                                section
 
 Of course, in-line data is accessed from within the program far more
 frequently that POD is likely to be, so there might also be convenience
 bindings of entries in the data hash to named C<$=NAME> variables (much
 as $1, $2, etc. are convenience bindings into components of the $/ match
 variable):
 
      $=LABEL2                --> Data object representing all C<=data LABEL2>
                                  sections
 
      ~ $=LABEL2              --> Concatenated text from all C<=data LABEL2>
                                  sections
 
      $=LABEL2[$n]            --> Text from only the Nth C<=data LABEL2>
                                  section
 
 "Data objects" would also have an iterator overloading, so that:
 
      for = $=DATA {...}
 
 would work as expected.
 
 
 =cut

Also;

 From: Damian Conway
 To: perl6-language@perl.org
 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [RFC] A more extensible/flexible POD (ROUGH-DRAFT)]
 
 Oh, and I forgot to mention:
 
 In the contents of any block, any line with '=' in column zero and a 
 whitespace character in column 1, has those two characters removed when the 
 contents are extracted. So you can write:
 
 =begin data POSSIBLE_POD_DIRECTIVES
 =
 = =doh -- Oh, dear! Oh frikking dear!
 = =ray -- A ravening beam of destruction
 = =me  -- A name I call my invocant
 = =far -- A long, long way to Australia
 = =sew -- What I do with contention
 = =LA  -- A place to follow trends
 = =tee -- I pipe to double streams
 =
 =end data
 
 To create the inline data:
 
 =doh -- Oh, dear! Oh frikking dear!
 =ray -- A ravening beam of destruction
 =me  -- A name I call my invocant
 =far -- A long, long way to Australia
 =sew -- What I do with contention
 =LA  -- A place to follow freaks
 =tee -- I pipe to double streams
 
 
 Damian

CLARIFICATION / STATEMENT OF INTENT

 From: Sam Vilain
 To: Damian Conway
 Cc: perl6-language@perl.org, Mark Overmeer <Mark@Overmeer.net>
 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [RFC] A more extensible/flexible POD (ROUGH-DRAFT)]
 
 Damian Conway wrote:
 > [No, I'm not back; I'm just passing by. But I feel that I need to 
 > comment on this whole issue]
 
 Thanks!  This message has lots of useful information that I would have 
 otherwise probably missed.
 
 It seems that the basic premise of the POD document object model gels 
 well with that early design document, so I look forward to being able to 
 flesh out the details.
 
 Using ^=\s to delimit a line starting with a = will interfere with the 
 Kwid method of:
 
   = Heading
 
   foo
 
 Which I was imagining would be converted to a DOM tree that when 
 represented in the "Normative XML" would look like:
 
   <sect1>
     <title>Heading</title>
     <para>foo</para>
   </sect1>
 
 That's sort of DocBook style, and in fact I was thinking that for the 
 internal representation, DocBook node names could be used where there is 
 no other better alternative.  Of course, non-documentation things like 
 Test fragments or inclusions of external entities, like UML diagrams 
 won't have a representation in DocBook :-).
 
 The uses of a leading = in a paragraph are fairly uncommon.  For 
 instance, when quoting POD you would simply indent it a bit to make it 
 verbatim and there is no issue.
 
 I see a middle ground; that is, `=` quoting is only is allowed if it 
 directly follows the initial POD marker;
 
   =head1 Foo
   =
   = =head1
   = =
   = = =head1 That's just getting ridiculous
 
 Which I see as represented by;
 
   <sect1>
     <title>Foo</title>
     <para>=head1
   =
   = =head1 That's just getting ridiculous</para>
   </sect1>
 
 Which of course would lose the ='s.  But that's OK, because if you 
 wanted verbatim you could have just indented the block.
 
 If you wanted to lead a normal paragraph with it, you'd just use the 
 normally implicit =para (equivalent to =pod):
 
   =para
   =
   = = This is what a Kwid =head1 looks like
 
 As for going with =kwid to denote the starting of kwid, I have so far 
 been pessimistically assuming that something like `=dialect kwid`, or 
 `=use kwid` (as described in the design doc you attached) would be 
 required.  However, we could allow `=unknown`, where `unknown` is an 
 unknown keyword, to try to load Pod::Dialect::unknown, and hope like 
 hell it provides the Role of Pod::Dialect.
 
 While the `^=` escaping is “active”, the presence or absence of 
 whitespace following the initial `=` will delimit breaks in paragraphs. 
   This has to be so, otherwise the previous example would have been:
 
   <sect1>
     <title>Foo
 
   =head1
   =
   = =head1 That's just getting ridiculous
   </title>
   </sect1>
 
 Which is just plain silly.  This follows what people are used to with 
 POD - blank lines must be empty, not just no non-whitespace characters 
 (an increasingly vague concept these days).
 
 So, the POD processing happens in 3 levels (note: the first isn't really 
 mentioned in perlpodspec.kwid, which is a bug);
 
 =list
 - chunkification from the original source, into POD paragraphs, which 
 may or may not include an initial `^=foo` marker.  At *this* level, the 
 only escaping that happens is the `^=` escaping.
 
 That's all that needs to happen while the code is being read, and for 
 most code that is how the POD will remain, in memory, somewhere 
 intermingled with the Parse Tree for the code, so that the code can 
 still be spat back out by the P6 equivalent of `B::Deparse`
 
 - parsing of these raw chunks into a real POD DOM.  Please, tired XML 
 veterans, please don't get upset by the use of the term "DOM", I think 
 the last thing anyone wants is to have studlyCaps functions like 
 `getElementById` and `createTextNode`.  It is the tree concept itself 
 which is important, and this pre-dates XML anyway.
 
 Strictly speaking, this step actually converts POD paragraph chunk 
 events into POD DOM events.  These can be used to build a real DOM, for 
 instance if you need to do an XPath style query for a link (I was amazed 
 that someone's actually gone and built Pod::XPath!), or they might 
 simply be passed onto the next stage by an output processor with no 
 intermediate tree being built.
 
 So, at this point, dialects get hooks to perform custom mutation of POD 
 paragraph events into DOM events, and the arbitrator of this process 
 ensures that the output events are well "balanced" by spitting out 
 closing tags where it has to.  They can store state in their parser 
 object, but none of this state will be preserved past the parsing state.
 However, the nodes that they "spit out" after this point may still not 
 be "core" POD, such as for includes or out-of-band objects.  These hooks 
 will be sufficient to allow them to hijack subsequent chunks that would 
 otherwise be served to other dialects, ie, they can choose to 
 "arbitrate" subsequent chunks.
 
 I'm aiming to make it so that it is possible for dialects to be "round 
 trip safe", by being able to go back from this DOM state to the original 
 POD paragraph chunks.  This would require dialects to "play nice" of 
 course, but is a potential option to help make things like smart text 
 editors be able to automatically syntax highlight POD dialects :).
 
 Linking will be in terms of this intermediate tree, so you won't be able 
 to link to included portions of manual pages :).  I'm not sure whether 
 that matters.
 
 - "output ready" form may also either be a stream of events or a DOM 
 tree.  In this mode, all of the events from the first stage are simply 
 fed through a loopback preprocessor, which asks Dialects to convert 
 their non-core nodes to core nodes, or drop them, or whatever.  At this 
 point, the structure can have handles to out of band objects like 
 images, etc - that can't be converted to XML.  Again, dialects are 
 capable of arbitrating the loopback process for any events that *follow* 
 theirs.
 
 Of course, documents that are not in a dialect (and do not have nodes 
 that `=include` and suchlike) will not need any pre-processing to be 
 ready for “output”.
 
 =end list
 
 If there is anything that you think is ghastly wrong with the above 
 picture, let me know of course, but I don't think it's actually all that 
 much different from what has to go on under the hood in a Pod parser or 
 markup tool, anyway.  In particular, MarkOv - as the author of the most 
 comprehensive POD markup system there is, this means you!  :-)
 
 There is a big question about inline styles still open, and how 
 converting paragraph bodies to a series of POD events works (clearly, 
 this is essential for single-paragraph Kwid list blocks, etc) - but I'm 
 hoping the answer will just smack me in the face as I start to work with 
 ingy on the prototype implementation, and specifying the details of what 
 node types the POD DOM and/or DTD allows.
 
 Now, I've done plenty of planning for this now, it's even looking 
 hopeful!  So time for me to keep quiet until I've built something :-).
 
 Sam.

FURTHER CORRESPONDANCE

 From: Damian Conway
 To: Sam Vilain
 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [RFC] A more extensible/flexible POD (ROUGH-DRAFT)]
 
 [Off-list]
 
 Hi Sam,
 
  > Using ^=\s to delimit a line starting with a = will interfere with the
  > Kwid method of:
  >
  >  = Heading
  >
  >  foo
 
 No it won't. It only applies under "classic" =pod.
 
 Once you invoke a different dialect, *its* parser has to do the parsing until
 the next =cut.
 
 
  > The uses of a leading = in a paragraph are fairly uncommon.  For
  > instance, when quoting POD you would simply indent it a bit to make it
  > verbatim and there is no issue.
 
 That's not all the =<space> is for. It's also for making long blocks hang
 together visually when they cross screen or page boundaries. For example:
 
 =begin commented out
 =
 = sub MODIFY_HASH_ATTRIBUTES {
 =     my ($package, $referent, @attrs) = @_;
 =     for my $attr (@attrs) {
 =         next if $attr !~ m/\A ATTRS? \s* (?:[(] (.*) [)] )? \z/xms;
 =         my ($init_val, $init_arg, $getter, $setter);
 =         if (my $config = $1) {
 =             $init_val = _extract_init_val($config);
 =             $init_arg = _extract_init_arg($config);
 =
 =             if ($getter = _extract_get($config)) {
 =                 *{$package.'::get_'.$getter} = sub {
 =                     return $referent->{$_[0]};
 =                 }
 =             }
 =             if ($setter = _extract_set($config)) {
 =                 *{$package.'::set_'.$setter} = sub {
 =                     croak "Missing new value in call to 'set_$setter'method"
 =                         unless @_ == 2;
 =                     my ($self, $new_val) = @_;
 =                     my $old_val = $referent->{$self};
 =                     $referent->{$self} = $new_val;
 =                     return $old_val;
 =                 }
 =             }
 =         }
 =         undef $attr;
 =         push @{$attribute{$package}}, {
 =             ref      => $referent,
 =             init_val => $init_val,
 =             init_arg => $init_arg,
 =             name     => $init_arg || $getter || $setter || '????',
 =         };
 =     }
 =     return grep {defined} @attrs;
 = }
 =
 =end commented out
 
 
  > I see a middle ground; that is, `=` quoting is only is allowed if it
  > directly follows the initial POD marker;
 
 Nope. That won't work. See below.
 
 
  >  =head1 Foo
  >  =
  >  = =head1
  >  = =
  >  = = =head1 That's just getting ridiculous
  >
  > Which I see as represented by;
  >
  >  <sect1>
  >    <title>Foo</title>
  >    <para>=head1
  >  =
  >  = =head1 That's just getting ridiculous</para>
  >  </sect1>
 
 Nope.  It's actually your "silly" result:
 
  >  <sect1>
  >    <title>Foo
  >
  >  =head1
  >  =
  >  = =head1 That's just getting ridiculous
  >  </title>
  >  </sect1>
 
 You wanted:
 
      =head1 Foo
 
      = =head1
      = =
      = = =head1 That's just getting ridiculous
 
 (Remember that the three equivalent syntaxes are:
 
      =begin TYPE [LABEL]
      ...
      =end TYPE [LABEL]
 
 and:
 
      =for TYPE [LABEL]
      ...
      <"empty" line>
 
 and:
 
      =TYPE ...
      ...
      <"empty" line>
 
 So:
 
      =head1 Foo
 
 is the same as:
 
      =for head1 [no label!]
      Foo
 
 or:
 
      =begin head1 [no label!]
      Foo
      =end head1
 
 In other words, for =headN commands, the title of the heading is the *data*,
 not the label.
 
 
  > This follows what people are used to with POD - blank lines must be
  > empty, not just no non-whitespace characters (an increasingly vague
  > concept these days).
 
 I don't think that's gonna fly. Both Larry and I are adamant that an empty
 line is one that doesn't match /\S/. Distinguishing behaviours according to
 the presence or absence of invisible whitespace has been hell for the past 20
 years. The precise problem is that, no matter how long they use POD, people
 *don't* get used to it. And, even if they do, their text editors don't
 get used to it, and happily splash whitespace into "empty" lines. We
 *must* overcome that.
 
 
  > As for going with =kwid to denote the starting of kwid, I have so far
  > been pessimistically assuming that something like `=dialect kwid`, or
  > `=use kwid` (as described in the design doc you attached) would be
  > required.  However, we could allow `=unknown`, where `unknown` is an
  > unknown keyword, to try to load Pod::Dialect::unknown, and hope like
  > hell it provides the Role of Pod::Dialect.
 
 Nice. And, of course, falls back to "Unknown POD command", if it fails
 to load Pod::Dialect::unknown.
 
 Damian

1 POD Error

The following errors were encountered while parsing the POD:

Around line 513:

Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in '“active”,'. Assuming UTF-8