[Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #9002] generate_html : Adding package_doc_options field to generate texinfo documentation

[Julien Bect]

Follow-up Comment #15, patch #9002 (project octave):

Ok, so let's keep this ticket open a little longer, to discuss a possibly
better choice of default package_doc_options for the OF option style (et the
default one, if need be).

> - An offline documentation could still use the absolute URL. This even works
in offline documents if there is an Internet connection.

I don't agree with that.  An offline documentation must be browseable offline
IMHO, so, without an internet connection.

Even if the "octave forge" option set is meant for the OF website, which is
online, one benefit of relative URLs is that the doc remains readable offline
is you wget it.


> - The option has been introduced for the octave-forge defaults, which should
be used to create an online OF website (otherwise you would have many more
problems like extra OF stuff that you don't want). Also the file name
octave-forge.css is very specific.

I agree with the first part (see above).

As for the second part, I am not sur what you mean by "very specific".  Is it
a bad thing.  Is it not meant to be specific, since ths is the "octave forge"
option set?


> - ../../octave-forge.css is not prepared to act as a stylesheet for the
package documentation in its current format (which is basically standard
texi2any output). A different file like ../../texi.css would have been
better.

About this I don't know yet, but this is certainly the most important point in
this discussion.

> In the current form I can't make use of the default value for
package_doc_options. It would have been better to just omit the --css-ref
option if in doubt.

I understand.  

There are currently only a small number of packages with documentation.  So,
we should look at the existing packages and perhaps ask other package
maintainers before we decide...

Can we (and should we) propose a default style sheet for the package
documentation on Octave Forge?  If yes, should it be independent of
octave-forge.css, or do we need to modify octave-forge.css?

Perhaps should we provide an additional field in the option structure, to make
it easier for each package maintainer to specify a different CSS stylesheet to
the package doc?  (I mean, easier than dealing directly with makeinfo
options.)


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?9002>

_______________________________________________
  Message posté via/par Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/