Ok, I've thought about that for a few days.
The idea behind the USDOcML-file is to have a docfile, that is independent of HTML, so the missing italic-tags are intended like that.
I think, that maybe this can't be made into a correct xml-file by my design.
For instance, you can make descriptions in different markup-languages, like MarkDown, etc, which I'm using heavily in the concepts-docs.
Markdown features things like the > element, which signals indented quotes what I'm using heavily for layout-stuff and I don't think, that > would be accepted by any Markdown-parser.
So I think I should remove the XML-line at the beginning, as this is misleading(I added markdown-support after design of the USDocML-Fileformat, so it's probably an oversight by me.)
So I came up with a different idea, that maybe we just need to make a converter, which converts this USDOcML into a useable XML-file, means: converting all markup-elements into their HTML-conform counterparts, making the structure a valid XML-file, which you can use for further stuff, including adding italic-tags into the functioncall-tags.
I think this would be a better approach than forcing USDOcML somehow into a webuseable format.
Another idea behind that(and why I don't add HTML-style stuff into it): you can use the USDOcML-file as basis for other tools and visualisations as well.
For instance, I'm thinking about making a tool for Reaper, which allows typing in some slugs and it shows you functions/statechunk-entries/configvars/etc that fit your filter-words.
That way we could get rid of endless searching through the docs-files. For that, html-tags and encoding-stuff would be a nightmare to parse for me and others.
I still can finish up my parser I started(it's using US-API-functions, so it's easy to build) and add a function, which allows adding the italics back into the functioncalls.
I have coded this already in my current scripts, so I would just reuse that.
My parser gives you all contents, allowing you to convert Markup-texts using external tools like PanDoc and you can create the XML-file the way you need it.
Should be easier to maintain for future additions(like the modular-concept I'm working on).
What do you think?
Oh and a biiig thank you for your work on that
