Thomas Ackermann wrote:
> When I want to tweak the html generation rules I also have to tweak the pdf
> generation rules because html and pdf should be as similiar to each other as
> possible.
Ah, *that's* what I missed. Thanks for explaining.
I think it's fine for the html and pdf to look diff
>
> If I understood the original commit message correctly, you were saying
> the XML file was not suitable for html generation and you wanted to
> tweak it, and were dropping the PDF target to avoid breaking it. Now
> if I understand correctly you are saying the XML file actually *is*
> suitable
Thomas Ackermann wrote:
>> Would generating different XML files
>> for the PDF and for other purposes (with different names) work as a
>> way to achieve that without losing the printable manual?
>
> This would be even worse when we have to create different xml depen
>
> I don't understand. Do you mean that you want to change the rules
> that generate user-manual.xml? Would generating different XML files
> for the PDF and for other purposes (with different names) work as a
> way to achieve that without losing the printable manual?
>
This would be even wors
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Ackermann wrote:
> This target was only used to create user-manual.pdf with dblatex
> using a separate style definition than was used for user-manual.html.
> These two style definitions had to be maintained separately and
> so made improvements to user-manual.html unnecessarily
This target was only used to create user-manual.pdf with dblatex
using a separate style definition than was used for user-manual.html.
These two style definitions had to be maintained separately and
so made improvements to user-manual.html unnecessarily hard.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Ackermann
---
6 matches
Mail list logo
