1.1 --- a/TODO.md	Wed Jul 20 12:16:36 2022 +0200
     1.2 +++ b/TODO.md	Sat Jul 23 20:05:25 2022 +0200
     1.3 @@ -1,12 +1,15 @@
     1.4  * MW: make Outer_Syntax.command \<^command_keyword>\<open>problem\<close> a model for ..\<open>Example\<close>
     1.5    An ML syntax error should be indicated in place (in the string after \<^keyword>\<open>Given\<close> etc)
     1.6    and not on the definition as a whole. 
     1.7 -    This however is not the case despite there is no ISAC code involved.
     1.8 -    Reproducible e.g. at https://hg.risc.uni-linz.ac.at/wneuper/isa/file/9c2e1efe5cde/src/Tools/isac/Knowledge/Biegelinie.thy#l108
     1.9 -    The respective improvement would be the model for WN continuing ..\<open>Example\<close>. 
    1.10 +    - in MathEngBasic/problem "Outer_Syntax.command \<^command_keyword>\<open>problem\<close>" there are writeln
    1.11 +      and comments with testdata from "problem pbl_bieg : "Biegelinien"" in Biegelinie.thy
    1.12 +    - in BridgeJEdit/Calculation.thy are remainings of time-consuming investigations
    1.13 +    - in MathEngBasic/problem there is guesswork ("TODO") how to reorganise "fun prep_input_PIDE"
    1.14 +      such that errors in "Given" etc are indicated WITHIN the term.
    1.15  
    1.16  * ?MW?: In Outer_Syntax.command \<^command_keyword>\<open>Example\<close> is there a quick fix
    1.17    for successfully replacing hacked Problem.parse_cas by parse_references_input?
    1.18 +    How get Token.src for testing purposes?
    1.19      How can Scan.* be traced?
    1.20      (Tracing should help understanding Problem.parse_cas, Problem.parse_model_input which involve Scan.*)
    1.21