Re: Fwd: [PATCH] different approach to --split html

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

address@hidden writes:
> 
> ??? How will this work for references that point to other documents?  If 

you could take the mswordview / latex2html approach. Processing a
document called foo will always resulting html files in a subdirectory
called foo/ .

> 
> > > There's also a problem with cross-references from other HTML documents: 
> > 
> > Yes, indeed.  Would it be ok to assume that the other html documents
> > are split if we're split and vice versa?
> 
> I don't think this is a valid assumption, in general.  Imagine a system 
> where some of the HTML files where produced by an old version of makeinfo 
> which didn't support splitting ;-)

I think that backward compatibility would make it too hard on us (but
you're only joking, right?)  OTOH, I can imagine split and non-split
files mixed together. This can be solved by always putting a non-split
.html into index.html in a subdirectory.

> Besides, Windows also doesn't allow those same characters in file names.
> 
> > This could be fixed using a hash, but I'd vote for dropping 8.3 until
> > maybe someone sends a clean patch for it.
> 
> That's okay, but let's not introduce additional obstacles for that 
> someone, by assuming that the DOS port will never run this code.  In 
> particular, replacing a few more characters in file names cannot possibly 
> hurt on Unix.

8.3 is enough to encode a 32bit hash value. If we put all .html in a
subdirectory, there can never be a clash with node files of other info
files.


-- 

Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   address@hidden    | http://www.cs.uu.nl/~hanwen/