On Wed, 2023-01-04 at 22:58 +0100, Federico Bruni wrote:
Il giorno mer 4 gen 2023 alle 14:39:47 +0100, Jonas Hahnfeld
<hahnjo@hahnjo.de> ha scritto:
> The other two formats we care about for the translated
documentation
> are PDF and HTML. Of the two, HTML is arguably the more complex
one in
> terms of infrastructure for cross-references: For PDF, we just
link to
> the (translated) heading in the right PDF file, and that's it.
For the
> split HTML build, however, we want the @node's to end up in a
.html
> file based on their English equivalent so that automatic language
> works if you open a page without the .html extension (question 0:
do we
> want to keep this ability?).
It's a good question. Some find it annoying, e.g. if you have a
localised browser but you want to read the english pages (because
translation is out-of-date or for other reasons). There is a
workaround: setting english as preferred language, but this affects
any
website you visit.
Yes, that's me basically. I could probably solve my personal use case
by proposing a patch that keeps the .html extension in links inside
the
English documentation (so whenever you chose English, you stay with
the
untranslated version), but I'm pretty sure others want a different
behavior (for example you below, I think). Anyway, I will take this as
"we probably want some automatic switching in one way or another",
which requires identical .html file names to start with.
What is the "annoyance" exactly?
1. All @ref{Translated} become @ref{Origin}, but as far as I
understand
that may actually be an advantage.
2. All @ruser{Translated} become @rusernamed{Origin,Translated}, ie
you
have to provide both the original @node *and* the translated display
text. For @unnumberedsec, we may even need a third argument to get the
anchor correct - not sure how often that is actually needed.