[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f
From: |
Per Bothner |
Subject: |
Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Feb 2002 23:38:12 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8+) Gecko/20020208 |
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 14:26:46 -0800
From: Per Bothner <address@hidden>
Unfortunately, it's not always practical to request that, given how
many characters we replace with dashes. Think about manuals that
describe C++ classes,
I do. The only characters likely to require mapping are things
like 'operator+' and possibly '::'.
No, there are much more characters that are mapped to a dash. `*',
`/', `^', `.', and many others.
I meant in context of "manuals that descibe C++ classes".
IMHO, it's no business of makeinfo to force authors to fix their
manuals due to the file-name clashes. There's nothing wrong with a
Texinfo manual which has two nodes like ".Foo" and "/Foo". Before
Texinfo 4.1, such a file would be accepted with no complaint, and
would produce a valid HTML file. It's IMHO wrong to reject it in the
next release.
Well, I'm not suggesting it be rejected (though a warning might be in
order when splitting). Leaving out the anchors is not the same as
rejecting. It makes for a minor decrease in redability, but if ".Foo"
and "/Foo" are mapped to the same file but (say) "Foo/" is mapped to a
sifferent file, even though the manual is written ".Foo", "Foo/" "/Foo",
well, in that case the manual is broken, period.
I have another idea, which I'll explain in a separate message..
The only situations where makeinfo should refuse to produce valid
output is when the source violates the Texinfo language
Texinfo is not very well-defined as to what are valid node names.
Perhaps we should change that.
--
--Per Bothner
address@hidden http://www.bothner.com/per/
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/01
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Per Bothner, 2002/02/13
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/13
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Per Bothner, 2002/02/13
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/14
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Per Bothner, 2002/02/14
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/15
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f,
Per Bothner <=
- mapping node names to filenames/urls, Per Bothner, 2002/02/15
- Re: mapping node names to filenames/urls, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/15
Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Per Bothner, 2002/02/13
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/14
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Per Bothner, 2002/02/14
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/15
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Per Bothner, 2002/02/15
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/15
- Re: bad relative urls in texinfo-4.0f, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/15