ALDs and IALs – why so restrictive? about kramdown

At least 3 workarounds are available for this "problem", so I would say leave it.

$ cat a.md
Hello world
{:.text-link .ref}

Hello world
{:class="text-link ref"}

Hello world
{:.text-link}
{:.ref}

$ kramdown a.md
<p class="text-link ref">Hello world</p>

<p class="text-link ref">Hello world</p>

<p class="text-link ref">Hello world</p>

[lydell]

You're right in putting quotation marks around the word problem—it's not such a big deal. Usually I avoid adding attributes at all. And, yes, there are workarounds. But that's just about a third of the issue.

In fact, the idiom for using a space between classes is already clearly shown in the kramdown doc, and reinforced in the maruku doc

More in particular, an attribute list is a whitespace-separated list of elements

[lydell]

That's right! That is how I found out how to correct my first kramdown code block above.

Is doing it exactly like Maruku a big concern? That is not the case currently anyway, since kramdown requires values to be quoted (key=val is not supported), and IALs cannot be put on the same line as a heading.

[gettalong]

The syntax and idea of ALDs and IALs came from Maruku originally but the current kramdown syntax is not compatible to the Maruku syntax. So compatibility with Maruku would not be a big concern for me.

As for warnings: As stated on the syntax page, anything inside of {: ... } that does not follow one of the current rules, is ignored, without warning on purpose.

As for omitting the space between class/id names: Will have a look at it. I think adjusting the regexps will probably do the trick.

[lydell]

As for warnings: As stated on the syntax page, anything inside of {: ... } that does not follow one of the current rules, is ignored, without warning on purpose.

Yes, the documentation is superb: Nicely styled, easy to read and seemingly covering everything. I still suggest warnings. How is just ignoring ever useful? It's not like anyone would think "now, lets put some crap in this IAL too, just for fun". The only time "crap" is present, is when the writer has made a mistake. I would be much more helpful if a warning was shown, instead of trying to spot the error manually.

Link id errors are already helpfully warned for.

$ kramdown
A link to [Google].

[goog1e]: http://google.com/
^Z
<p>A link to [Google].</p>

Warning: No link definition for link ID 'google' found

Why can't IALs and ALDs be helpful too?

[gettalong]

A warning will now be shown when an IAL/ALD contains no valid attributes.

As for allowing the new syntax: After looking at it, this involves a bit more than just modifying the regexps. Patches are welcome because I currently have no time for looking deeper into this.

[lydell]

A warning will now be shown when an IAL/ALD contains no valid attributes.

That's better. It solves the original test case (but not, as you mention, a mix of valid and invalid, such as {:.a.b .c}, which would be better).

As for allowing the new syntax: After looking at it, this involves a bit more than just modifying the regexps. Patches are welcome because I currently have no time for looking deeper into this.

If it's too much work—don't bother, since we've got warnings now (and that excellent documentation).

If I knew ruby, I would definitely take a stab at both points. :)

[gettalong]

The problem with allowing #id.class.class2 and the like is that... oh, wait, I think I might have just thought of an easy and fast solution 😄... will try it later and write again

[gettalong]

Yep, works. Will be in the next release.