threads / discuss / 34189

patchAw: Re: [PATCH] Remove pdf target from Makefiles

Subject: Aw: Re: [PATCH] Remove pdf target from Makefiles

## tl;dr

2 messages between Jun 18, 2013 and Jun 18, 2013. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 1people: 2as markdown or json

Thomas Ackermann· Jun 18, 2013, 07:59 UTC · lore
Show 6 quoted lines
> 
> I don't understand.  Do you mean that you want to change the rules
> that generate user-manual.xml?  Would generating different XML files
> for the PDF and for other purposes (with different names) work as a
> way to achieve that without losing the printable manual?
>

This would be even worse when we have to create different xml depending on the wanted output. The problem here is in the xml->pdf/html step: I wanted to change the formatting of links in the pdf from "Section <number>" to "<section_name>" to make it the same as in the html. Thereby I noticed that the definition for this is in files from /etc/asciidoc/dblatex. So to change it we have to introduce our own files in ./Documentation and work on them to bring the formatting of user-manual.html and user-manual.pdf closer together.

--- Thomas

Jonathan Nieder· Jun 18, 2013, 16:19 UTC · re: Thomas Ackermann · lore

Re: Re: [PATCH] Remove pdf target from Makefiles

Thomas Ackermann wrote:
Show 11 quoted lines
>>                                 Would generating different XML files
>> for the PDF and for other purposes (with different names) work as a
>> way to achieve that without losing the printable manual?
>
> This would be even worse when we have to create different xml depending on the
> wanted output. The problem here is in the xml->pdf/html step: I wanted to change
> the formatting of links in the pdf from "Section <number>" to "<section_name>" to
> make it the same as in the html. Thereby I noticed that the definition for this is
> in files from /etc/asciidoc/dblatex. So to change it we have to introduce our own files
> in ./Documentation and work on them to bring the formatting of user-manual.html
> and user-manual.pdf closer together.
Now I'm even more confused. ;-)

If I understood the original commit message correctly, you were saying the XML file was not suitable for html generation and you wanted to tweak it, and were dropping the PDF target to avoid breaking it. Now if I understand correctly you are saying the XML file actually *is* suitable for html generation, and that the html generation rules just need tweaking. In that case, why remove the PDF target?

Puzzled, Jonathan

← back to recent threads