On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 04:43:06PM +0000, Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > > Another reason for changing the formatting is that there is a new > > output format being implemented, to LaTeX. Should the 'flawed' > > semantics be used for that new output format too, mimicking TeX > > output even when it does not make sense? > > IMHO, it's quite simple: All output formats, i.e., TeX, HTML, and the > new LaTeX backend, should produce identical output if technically > possible – and for LaTeX it's definitely possible :-) Anything else > makes texinfo harder to use.
I can't see why having different output makes texinfo harder to use. Having all output identical does not seem to me to be a goal of Texinfo formatting. To me an important element of the Texinfo philosophy is that the Texinfo code describes the intent of the document, not the formatting. As long as the formatting convey this intent, the details of the formatting are not relevant and differences among outputs are not an issue. If some formatting looks better, then it could be used in the different formats, simply because it looks better, but not because there would be a goal of identical output. TeX and LaTeX are very similar, such that it would make sense to try to have similar formatting too. But similar is not the same, even if technically possible. For instance, it is possible to tune the LaTeX output to have the same spacing before chapters, same formatting of chapter title presentation than in TeX PDF output, but I think that it is not a good idea to do so. Both the formatting of chapters as done in LaTeX in the default case and done by Texinfo TeX convey the semantics of a chapter. (As a side note, I think that there is too much information in the Texinfo manual on the formatting, but it is not an issue if the wording shows that it is a possibility for formatting not necessarily the implementation). -- Pat
