Hi,

Thanks for your feedback, and sorry for taking a while to respond.

Your objections are very reasonable and parsing these lists as regular
paragraphs is a decent alternative, but it also has its drawbacks. So I came up
with a third solution. The main drawback was that these lists without markers
are often used to add paragraphs in a list item without visually adding a new
list element or ending the list. By using paragraphs, we would visually end the
list. My solution to this is to add the list items without markers as
paragraphs to the last item of the list immediately before if there is one. In
the other cases we propose to just use paragraphs as you suggested.

I have attached a docx file and an HTML file to demonstrate both cases and how
they would be rendered with my solution.

What are your thoughts on this solution? If you think it's good I'll send a
pull request either Friday or in two weeks.
On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 7:39:23 PM UTC+2 John MacFarlane wrote:

I guess I do have objections to features that get implemented
in just a couple of formats, leaving the work of implementing
them in others to other people.

There's also a question whether it makes sense to support
this kind of list -- that depends on whether it has a reasonable
rendering in enough of the formats we support. (Particularly
in Markdown, which is supposed to be expressive enough for
everything in the AST, with the current exception of some of
the new table features.)

What about parsing these docx lists as just lists of regular
paragraphs? Then they'll render pretty well in every output
format.

Milan Bracke <milan....@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Both docx and HTML have a list type named "none", where no marker is shown.
> However, Pandoc doesn't support these types of lists and will put numbers
> instead. See the attached docx file for an example.
>
> We would like to add a ListNumberStyle called None in pandoc-types and use
> it in
> the docx reader and HTML writer. For HTML5, we can't use the "type"
> attribute so
> we will have to fall back on the "list-style-type" CSS as described here:
> https://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_ol_type.asp, and for docx the change
> seems
> simple since all the types can be set with w:numFmt.
>
> We'd prefer not to implement the usage of the new type in the other readers
> and
> writers yet. (We'll of course avoid breaking them.) We only need it in the
> two
> mentioned above and we don't master all the file types in Pandoc. Is this
> OK and
> should we make an issue to track the progress in the other readers and
> writers
> when people implement the new type there?
>
> Do you have any feedback or objections? If there are no objections, we'll
> make
> a pull request soon.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pandoc-discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pandoc-discus...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/4e936aa2-41d6-4d68-ba5a-bea916754922n%40googlegroups.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pandoc-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/11e20690-21cc-4287-81b0-e5f3e191cf1bn%40googlegroups.com.