Reiner Steib <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, May 31 2006, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Reiner Steib <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> ,----[ CHANGES ] >>> | * The LaTeX tool bar is now enabled by default. See *Note Running >>> | TeX and friends::. >>> `---- >> >> But the latter makes no sense in plain text. > > IMHO it's better then no reference at all in the plain text output.
And it is worse than a hand-written human-understandable reference. > We do the same in No Gnus for GNUS-NEWS[1] since more than 2 years > and no user complained. So it seems the users understand that these > are references to the manual(s) or they don't read GNUS-NEWS. ;-) Or they just ignore stuff that seems to make no sense. >> We don't want junk in CHANGES. So I still maintain that >> no-validate seems like a bad idea, since it stops us from seeing >> problems. > > I don't see that --no-validate stops us from seeing problems, > because we will see problems (if any) when creating the info files. I consider a "Note" referring to some node in an completely unspecified manual a problem. > But as we seem to disagree, I will add "@ifclear rawfile" as you > suggested and remove --no-validate. Thanks. As you can see in this (and other files), there has been quite a bit of work invested for keeping these sort of unspecified cross references out of the plain text versions. It would not make sense to change this practice for a single new note without a previous discussion, even if I happened to be alone with my opinion. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
