Am Freitag, 7. Juni 2002 11:31 schrieb Robert M. Muench: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > Volker Nitsch > > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 12:16 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [REBOL] Re: RFC: make-doc-pro feature / glossary > > > > for glossary: if you mark only for html, that would be visible only > > there. > > Hi, that's just the idea for HTML output. For PDF output it would be > possible to include an implicit chapter "glossary". > > > the benefit of make-doc dialect is, it is readble as text too. > > That's what it should be :-)) > > > dialect?: something special nearly the same as the usual. > > text?: you can't use smart hovering.. > > html?: text which knows there is a mouse. > > make-doc?: a quick way to write good looking. > > > > for general words there is an include-option. > > So is this just the definition of the glossary words or do you want to > include this into normal text? Will all words in the text show the glossary > term? > > How about: > > \glossary > > :dialect - something special nearly the same as usual. > > =include general_words.r > /glossary >
i read a paragraph and think - hmm, is this a well known word? and then describe it better. so i would like to have the special glossary close. the "\glossary" needs a lot lines. glossary?: an explanation of words. paragraph?: a piece of related text. I use make-doc primarily as text, with translation only occasianally. it opens faster, i always change something and so on. So the text-version should include everything. in various files (readme, manual..), but each of them should be pleasant readable. \glossary :glossary - an explanation of words. :paragraph - a piece of related text. /glossary hmm? > > Robert Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
