Hi, Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> Rasmus <ras...@gmx.us> writes: > >> Eric Abrahamsen <e...@ericabrahamsen.net> writes: >> >>> The only real problem I encountered was that links to external Info >>> manuals did not export correctly, and couldn't be followed. I gave up on >>> learning the exact syntax of texinfo's @[px]ref commands because it was >>> dinnertime, but I can figure out what went wrong and maybe provide a >>> patch. >> >> I am not sure either. I couldn’t get cross-referencing working. >> >> >> http://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/texinfo.html#Cross-References >> >> The texinfo part of the Org manual could use a section on >> cross-referencing > > IIRC, cross-referencing is straightforward. It should just work. I could not get it to work. I tried stuff like "[[(org) Tables]]", "[[*(org) Tables]]" and , [[texinfo:(org) tables]]. It is always unresolved. I couldn’t think of any other way of referencing an external manual, even skimming ox-texinfo.el, so it is not straightforward to me. >>> The other thing I'd like to know is how to "inline" sections (ie output >>> several sections on a single page), but still have links to those >>> sections work correctly. >> >> Are you talking about info pages now? Because in pdf and html it’s not an >> issue as far as I’m aware. > > The OP is probably talking about @heading and al. > > There is actually no way to specify such a "nodeless" heading (more > exactly, an unnumbered heading that doesn't appear in the table of > contents), because I couldn't find any appealing syntax (i.e., not too > low level, and, if possible, generic enough). > > I agree this is the last major issue in this export back-end. That is why I asked for a reference as I do not remember having seen such a layout in an info page. If we know of an example, it might not be hard to implement. > What it sophisticated referencing? "ox-texinfo" supports internal and > external links without specific syntax. @pxref and @xref is just > syntactic sugar over @ref. > > "ox-texinfo.el" supports @email, @ref and @uref. I don’t know as I am not a texinfo expert, but in the texinfo manual they tell you to be vary of @ref. It is probably a bit over the top. The @ref command can tempt writers to express themselves in a manner that is suitable for a printed manual but looks awkward in the Info format. Bear in mind that your audience could be using both the printed and the Info format. For example: Sea surges are described in @ref{Hurricanes}. looks ok in the printed output: Sea surges are described in Section 6.7 [Hurricanes], page 72. but is awkward to read in Info, “note” being a verb: Sea surges are described in *note Hurricanes::. Also, does Org support all four @ref arguments? In either case, these are questions that I find reasonable and cannot find the answer to in the manual. >> Another area that seems slightly lacking is support for all markings, so >> perhaps there could be a section on accessing your favorite via >> ‘org-texinfo-text-markup-alist’ (if ‘org-texinfo--text-markup’ supports >> it) and the rest via macros, if necessary. >> >> >> http://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/texinfo.html#Marking-Text > > IMO, advanced marking is not needed, at least out of the box. For > example, @kbd{M-@key{TAB}} in Texinfo is morally equivalent to ~M-<TAB>~ > in Org, as long as the document targets info. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I guess the idea of Texinfo is produce info, html, and paper manuals consistently, though. I personally agree, but just look at the Org manual and the fuss about @code vs @samp (which, I believe, are also displayed in the same way). Texinfo is proudly pedantic. People exporting to Texinfo might care about @kbd{} vs @code{} and explaining how to get such fine-grained control would be a fine thing to document in the manual IMO. Rasmus -- Hooray!
