On Sat, Feb 5, 2022 at 9:14 AM Patrice Dumas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > I think that it is not a good thing to have the base manual name, or the > base manual name with .html prepended as default directory for html > output, for three reasons: > * I think that a directory with the manual name should be reserved for > other purposes, for example keeping in it include texinfo files, > images, init files, CSS files, translations... > * it does not generalize well to other output formats. > > I propose instead to prepend _html to the base manual name, and use > similar conventions for other (future) split formats.
(I think you mean postpend or suffix with _html, rather than prepend, e.g. BASE_html not _htmlBASE.) Using _html would be fine in my opinion for output. Having a directory called e.g. "texinfo.html" was always a bit odd as you expect that to be a single file. > Currently for > epub, which is a bit special as it is not the final output, which is a > .epub file, the directory name has _epub_package prepended. > > The HTML Xref specification would be modified accordingly. The URL for a manual is something different. Adding "_html" to the name of the manual would make the URL worse. If the directory is output with _html then the files should still be uploaded to the web server in a directory named after the manual. I believe it is the gendocs.sh script from Gnulib that is used by many GNU packages for building web documentation; we should check this still works with any changes.
