On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 01:37:32AM +0800, Timothy wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> 2¢ from me: I have yet to see an example which seems like it actually needs the
> ability to go “up” a level. Sometimes I need to rethink my initial impulses, but
> often it forces me to use a better structure.
> 
> Considering the example used in the thread, I would think it lends itself to
> something like this:

Thanks. I /think/ that's not the point: "classical" text documents
seem to do fine without (let me call it) XML-style nesting (aka
"going back", as witnessed by TeX/LaTeX, which after all, come from
"classical" (scientific) text. We had this in the discussion.

There seem to be a few folks around here which are uncomfortable
with this limitation. My intent is rather to understand where this
discomfort comes from and what we can do about it.

I must admit that I was surprised about that limitation at first,
but seeing how papers and books and TeX and LaTeX do helped to
dispel that irritation of mine. That isn't necessarily the case for
everyone, though.

Just once I had (or thought I had) to have this and I shared here
my "hack", which worked perfectly well (after "enhancing" the one
exporter). But I think I was misusing a document description language
as a data description language (people do such things, disgusting,
I know ;-)

Thanks & cheers
-- 
t