On 01/07/2025 04:05, Collin Funk wrote:
Hi Pádraig,
One small thing I noticed while looking over this patch.
Pádraig Brady <p...@draigbrady.com> writes:
+Three input formats are supported. Either the "untagged" output format,
+the "tagged" output format, or the BSD reversed mode format
+which is similar to the "untagged" output format
This makes Texinfo emit the following:
Either the "untagged" output format, the "tagged"
But using, for example, ``untagged'' will emit:
Either the “untagged” output format, the “tagged”
So, ``...'' will use U+201C (LEFT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK) and U+201D
(RIGHT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK). I checked both HTML and PDF outputs.
The Unicode characters look much better, in my opinion, especially in
the PDF.
Since it seems ``...'' is more common than "..." in the manual anyways,
this patch felt obvious enough to commit right away.
Cool. I see no more instances matched by the following at least:
grep -E '^[^@#].{5,} "[[:alpha:]]{1,}"' doc/coreutils.texi
That's a bit too fuzzy match though to put in a syntax check I think.
I also pushed a similar change that fixes instances of:
grep -E '@samp\{"[^"}]' doc/coreutils.texi
That's less likely to be an issue going forward,
so I didn't add a syntax check for that either.
thanks!
Padraig
