>> rst_header (that you sensibly would do, I think) that couldn't be done in
>> the Python script. `rst_header` has very limited use, but it is another
>> possibility, mainly for the user-editable aspect. --[[ulrik]]
+>>
+>> (I foresaw only two things to be added to the rst_header: the default
+>> role could be configured there (as with rst_wikirole), and if you have a
+>> meta-role like :shortcut:, shortcuts could be defined there.)
+>
+> I have some discussion on the [docutils mailing list][dml], the developers
+> of docutils seems to favor "Proposal 1", while I defend my ideas. They
+> want all users of ReST to use only the basic featureset to remain
+> compatible, of course. -- [[ulrik]]
+
+[dml]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.text.docutils.user/5376
Some rst-custom [examples are here](http://kaizer.se/wiki/rst_examples/)
>>>> :wiki:`wikilink` syntax) to any other markup, for example None.
>>>> --[[ulrik]]
>>
->> The named link syntax (just like the :wiki: role) are inspired from trac
->> and a good fit, but only if the wiki is committed to using only rst,
->> which I don't think is the case.
+>> The named link syntax (just like the :wiki: role) are inspired from
+>> [trac][tracrst] and a good fit, but only if the wiki is committed to
+>> using only rst, which I don't think is the case.
>>
>> The rst-customize changes are very useful for custom directive
>> installations (like the sourcecode directive, or shortcut roles I show
>> -- [[ulrik]]
>>> Seems it could be, yes. --[[Joey]]
+>>>
+>>>> It is not clear how we can work around reST wrapping directives with
+>>>> paragraph tags. Also, some escaping of xml characters & <> might
+>>>> happen, but I can't imagine right now what breakage can come from that.
+>>>> -- [[ulrik]]
+
+[tracrst]: http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/WikiRestructuredText
### Implementation ###