On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Rogers, Michael K
<mroge02@emory.edu> wrote:
XML seems a nice way for machines to deal with data. But it's not a very human way to speak. I mean, if I write "\section{One}...\section{Two}" isn't it obvious that section One ends when section Two begins? Why should I have to write \endsection, when the machine can do the bookkeeping for me? The start/stop mechanism is nice as an option, if you plan to produce an XML document from ConTeXt. However the XML translator could implement 'if not first section then "</section><section>" else "<section>"' and add "if in_a_section then "</section>"' when \stoptext is reached.
Hm, consider this
\section{One} \input knuth
Text
\section{Two} \input knuth
and
\startsection{One} \input knuth
\stopsection
Text
\startsection{Two} \input knuth
\stopsection
In the last one it's clear that Text is not in the section One or in the section Two: In the first one, Text is in section One --- but how can I put Text so that is not in section One and not in section Two ?
Most of the time section One ends where section Two begins, but it's not true that *always* section One ends where section Two begins : infact the last one is a legal example.