On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 05:19:50PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 09:40:35 +0100 > > From: Patrice Dumas <[email protected]> > > > > Ok. The more I think about it, the more I agree that it should be left > > that way, ie that novalidate only cares about errors that are real > > errors in every case, not errors of consistency. This means that the > > "Pointer Validation" node should be modified to separate what > > novalidate checks, I think it is only the point 1: > > > > 1. If a 'Next', 'Previous', or 'Up' node reference is a reference to a > > node in the current file and is not an external reference such as > > to '(dir)', then the referenced node must exist. > > > > So the part at the beginning about novalidate should only be associated > > with that point. > > IMO, it would be a shame to lose the other parts of the validation (if > this is what you are trying to say). If eventually the decision is to > leave some validation out of the default operation, at least please > add some command-line option or variable to turn that back on. Being > able to validate the structure of a document is sometimes very > important.
He's referring to the @novalidate command and --no-validate option to texi2any. Structure validation is on anyway; the question was whether it could be turned off. We agree that @novalidate shouldn't turn it off.
