Francois Gouget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Maybe you just compared the PostScript files? Our Makefile does not use > print.dsl for generating the PostScript files which I think is a bug!
No I checked the pdf, all I could see was some spacing differences. I don't think it's a big problem. > So we have three options before us: > 1. keep the current situation > -> ugly hacks in default.dsl > > 2. remove the 'hard-code color hacks' from default.dsl > -> we lose the color customization > > 3. remove the 'hard-code color hacks' from default.dsl and reference a > winedoc.css file > -> preserves the current look > -> the doc look becomes more flexible and maintainable > > I'd be happy with either 2 or 3. I'm happy with 1. It works, and the doc looks good enough. I haven't ever heard anybody complain about not being able to change the colors of the html, I don't think that's an issue at all. As for the ugliness of default.dsl, IMO the whole docbook stuff is one big ugly mess, so that's lost in the noise <g> -- Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
