Style syntax for related variables
Description
This adds syntax for calling related variables.
Overall, I think this should be a simple change. The only shortcoming I see is that it won't be possible to call name variables on different levels from a single cs:names element. (Don't know if that's a real problem.)
Closes #357
Type of change
- [X] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [X] This change requires a documentation update
Checklist
- [X] I have installed the repo pre-commit hook; if not, and I have modified any of the schema files, I have run trang and/or prettier on the files, per CONTRIBUTING
- [X] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [] I have included suggested corresponding changes to the documentation (if relevant)
I don't think that's a real problem. Rendering both standard and related names just requires a group in that case, and allowing otherwise would be messy with the multiple="combine" attribute.
Another problem: if we keep
original-title, what happens if you call text variable="original-title" related="original".
Probably related to my question on testing syntax.
I think that would just be empty---I don't think anyone would write that and processors don't need to design any special case around that.
We could disallow it on styles. But that would be complicated. But maybe it's not necessary.
What would you think about another syntax: text original-variable="title"' instead of @related? (That wouldn't work on cs:group though...)
@related is much more extensible for the future.
So, you say better leave it as is?
Yes.
I've now also added test syntax.
Also, I've changed the wording from @related to @relation. Ok with that?
Sorry I've been MIA. At some point (hopefully soon) I'll get back to these.
I note this has conflicts that need resolving, though.
Just bumping this. Where does it stand?
I am assuming, @denismaier, the conflicts will need to be resolved by rebasing this branch on v1.1. See what happens if you do this from the branch dir:
git rebase v1.1
git push --force-with-lease
If and when we do get back this, see note above, and a couple of example fragments would be helpful in the main post.