Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:50:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/20028: ASCII docs should reflect <emphasis> tags in the source Message-ID: <200008242050.NAA39941@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR docs/20028; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: Rasmus Kaj <kaj@raditex.se> Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: docs/20028: ASCII docs should reflect <emphasis> tags in the source Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:49:36 -0700 On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 12:53:02PM +0200, Rasmus Kaj wrote: > > Well, *foo* looks like bold to some, but isn't, really. Same goes for > /bar/ ... So, while I'm in favor of <strong>foo</strong> -> *foo* > and <em>bar</em> -> _bar_ or /bar/, I think <b> and <i> really should > be ignored when font controll isn't availible. I think I agree here. If we changed the style sheet to output either <em> or <strong> when it seems the DocBook <emphasis> tag and then hack w3m to produce either some variation on *foo* when it sees that tag then we'd accomplish the task of translating <emphasis> to something visiable in ASCII docs and avoid screwing things up that actually do use <b> or <i> for typographic reasions. > Also, you may want to make it possible to disable this stuff in > certain tags, for example, if you have an example command line that > looks like: > > % *rm* /junk/ > > ... then there is bound to be some questions about that ... :-) That's a style sheet issue. In this case we probably shouldn't be writing <strong>rm</strong> <em>junk</em> as html output because that's not what we mean. In this case we really do mean <b>rm</b> <i>junk</i> because this is purley a typographical convention at this point not a symantic markup. > That said, I agree with the basic suggestion that it would be nice to > have e.g. <emphasis> render visibly in plain text. My prefrence is for a result that <emphasis> renders in the *baz* style. I think what I'll do is hack up some patches to <emphasis> translates to <em> and w3m translates <em> and <strong> to *. -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200008242050.NAA39941>