I think Rhys is right on the mountain/molehill score. But beyond that,
you've pointed out several things that I will happily accept as textual
changes to the text/enriched spec:
1. I'll do something about the wording regarding "\n" in the sample program.
2. I'll at least mention that the final
putc('\n', stdout);
is only needed in line-buffered environments.
3. I think we can handle the close-verbatim/open-verbatim problem with
some advice to implementors, which I'll go ahead and add; basically, it
never had occurred to me that someone would split a line there, and I'll
just add a recommendation against it. Sound OK?
4. I'll add a mention that formatting command names are case-insensitive.
5. I'll try to figure out why the sample parser botches the stream:
<param><<</param>
6. I'll add a "nofill" environment. What the heck....
Sound reasonable? -- Nathaniel