netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] docs: networking: nfc: convert from txt to rst

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191123111409.75d7b2e4@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date:   Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:14:09 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] docs: networking: nfc: convert from txt to rst

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 08:43:01 +0100, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> here is v2 of the series converting the NFC documentation from txt to
> rst. Thanks to Jonathan and Dave for the input.
> 
> Changes since (implicit) v1:
> 
> * replace code-block by more compact :: syntax
> 
> * really add the rst file to the index

Applied, thanks.

I have a question and potential follow up to ask for, though.

When the NFC doc gets rendered to HTML now, the "The NFC subsystem is
responsible for:" line is highlighted. I believe this always happens
when a list immediately follows an unindented line, in this case:

The NFC subsystem is responsible for:
	- NFC adapters management;
	- Polling for targets;
	- Low-level data exchange;

I've run into this writing my own docs recently, and I wonder what does
the highlight signify? My understanding is that the highlighting is
done because sphinx assumes the line proceeding the list is its
title/heading.

In most cases (like above) it's not really a heading so there should be
an empty line before the list.

Is this correct Jon?