Re: Tick Reduction

[Stefan Kangas]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> The variable/function symbols are links and stand out on their own, and
> the keys also have their own distinct faces.  Without them, this would
> look like:

This is better.

> And, of course, we could also consider using proportional fonts for the
> non-code prose bits:

This would be even better still.

However, if we want to start using proportional fonts, I think we will
run into issues with:

- Code fragments
- Tables
- Lists

My vote would be for expanding the docstring syntax to also handle these
things, and I think it'd be natural to base it on Org-mode.  We might
also want some other way to mark things as monospace that is not `foo'
(in which case it will be linked if there is such a Lisp symbol, which
is not correct e.g. when referring to the executables "man" or "whois").

So, for example:

1. A table would look like:

    | foo | bar |
    | baz | bzz |

2. Monospace would look like:

    =this=

3. A code fragment would look like:

    #+begin_src
    (defun foo () ...)
    #+end_src

4. Lists would look like:

    - Foo
    - Bar
    - Baz

   Lists could be rendered with "•" on capable displays.

We could make adjustments or even base it on something else like
Markdown.  I think Org-mode is closer to home, but that's me.

While we are at it, we could also introduce /italic/, and maybe even
*bold* (but we would need clear guidelines to avoid people going
overboard, i.e. I would not use *bold* for anything but "WARNING:" or
similar).