You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I use the latest pandoc-ling 2a1e55a as of July 4, 2022. I found that the question particle/marker Q, which is listed in Leipzig Glossing Rules, is not rendered as shown below. Generally speaking, the current implementation may not render one-character abbreviations such as Q, A, S, P, F, M and so on.
I think the issue should be resolved if [%u%d][%u%d] in l.447 and l.455 of pandoc-ling.lua is replaced with one [%u%d]. Could you mind pointing out whether any problem arises when we replace [%u%d][%u%d] with [%u%d] or why [%u%d][%u%d] is originally used there?
I use the latest pandoc-ling 2a1e55a as of July 4, 2022. I found that the question particle/marker
Q
, which is listed in Leipzig Glossing Rules, is not rendered as shown below. Generally speaking, the current implementation may not render one-character abbreviations such asQ
,A
,S
,P
,F
,M
and so on.I think the issue should be resolved if
[%u%d][%u%d]
in l.447 and l.455 ofpandoc-ling.lua
is replaced with one[%u%d]
. Could you mind pointing out whether any problem arises when we replace[%u%d][%u%d]
with[%u%d]
or why[%u%d][%u%d]
is originally used there?pandoc-ling/pandoc-ling.lua
Line 447 in 2a1e55a
pandoc-ling/pandoc-ling.lua
Line 455 in 2a1e55a
MWE
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: