Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:

> Thanks for the update, and apologies in advance for being bold, as
> I have some additional comments about it.

Constructive critics and suggestions are always welcome. And we do not
have pressing deadlines here :)

>> * doc/org-manual.org (Emphasis and Monospace): Advice users to insert
>> zero width space when Org does not parse emphasized text correctly.
>
> Org _does_ parse emphasized text correctly. It may be seen as
> unintuitive, but it's really a fontification problem. Anyway, this is
> just a commit message…

Agree. It just that the example in the patch _feels_ wrong considering
intuitive definition of verbatim borrowed from LaTeX.

Commit messages are also important, especially years later. I updated
the commit message in the attached new version of the patch.

> Thinking about it a bit more, you might be right: we may slightly change
> the closing part of the emphasis regexp, e.g.:
>
>   (seq
>    (not space)
>    (group ,mark)
>    (or (any space ?- ?')
>        (and (any ?. ?, ?\; ?: ?! ?? ?\" ?\) ?\} ?\\ ?\[) (or space line-end))
>        line-end))
>
> The logic behind this is that in regular text, we assume usual
> punctuation rules apply.

This will fail for "*Bold*?!" or "/Italics/!!!"

Also, is there any reason why we are not simply using punctuation
character class instead of listing punctuation chars explicitly (and
only for English)? What about "_你叫什么名字_？"

Maybe just

(seq
 (not space)
 (group ,mark)
 (0+ (in punctuation))
 (or space line-end))

> My concern is that the more complicated is the rule, the more difficult
> it is to predict. Also, we introduce new corner case, e.g.,
>
>   Woot! I just released Org *10*.0!
>
> So, I'm not totally convinced it is worth the trouble.

I am not sure if "Org *10*.0" is a good general example. It is probably
one of those cases when users want fine control over emphasis and must
use zero width space.

Best,
Ihor