Issues with SDL final separator for latex or math expression [in Activity-Beta]

0 votes
asked May 16, 2020 in Bug by The-Lu (60,440 points)

Hello PlantUML team,

To continue with:

We observe the same issue with some other end SDL separator:

With /

:<latex>P(y|\mathbf{x}) \mbox{ or } f(\mathbf{x})+\epsilon</latex>/

PlantUML diagram
[Click to image to see all code on PlantUML server]

With }

:<latex>P(y|\mathbf{x}) \mbox{ or } f(\mathbf{x})+\epsilon</latex>}

PlantUML diagram

With >

:<latex>P(y|\mathbf{x}) \mbox{ or } f(\mathbf{x})+\epsilon</latex>>

PlantUML diagram

Idem With <

And for |, we observe:

:<latex>P(y|\mathbf{x}) \mbox{ or } f(\mathbf{x})+\epsilon</latex> |
:<latex>P(y|\mathbf{x}) \mbox{ or } f(\mathbf{x})+\epsilon</latex>|

PlantUML diagram

If that can help to test,

Your answer

Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:

[Antispam2 Feature: please please wait 1 or 2 minutes (this message will disappear) before pressing the button otherwise it will fail](--------)
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.
0 votes
answered Jan 12 by plantuml (293,520 points)

Probably the idea of changing the final ; separator for SDL by another character was a bad idea beacause it's confusing for the parser.

Instead of changing this final separator, we could use stereotype instead.

So for example, instead of:
:this is an example|

We could have:
:this is an example; <<task>>

Or another example:

would become:
:demo; <<input>>

What do you think about it?

Here are the actual possibility and we are out of inspiration for most of them:

  •     <   <<input>>
  •     >   <<output>>
  •     /   <<foo1>>
  •     \   <<foo2>>
  •     ]   <<foo3>>
  •     }   <<foo4>>
  •     |   <<task>>


commented Jan 12 by The-Lu (60,440 points)


IMHO that seems good;
And conform with all the PlantUML philosophy... (as stereotype: port, end, join,...)

The last question will be:

  • How to manage multi-line ?
multi line; <<input>>

and how manage special char on multi-line, as:

multi line 1
multi line >>
; <<input>>


multi line 1
multi line >>; <<input>>

and the worst:

multi line 1;
multi line >>
; <<input>>

multi line 1;
multi line >>
; <<input>>

For multi-line:

  • Is it necessary to oblige `;` on the begin of the line....

And some questions arise as: 


commented Jan 13 by plantuml (293,520 points)

We've just published a new snapshot that support the new syntax:

Any though about stereotype names? We are not sure they are the right one.


commented Jan 14 by The-Lu (60,440 points)
That seems good.

But we can ask the question on PlantUML Github Discussion to confirm...

commented Jan 19 by The-Lu (60,440 points)