bug-texinfo
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: @value, macro and other expansion questions


From: Karl Berry
Subject: Re: @value, macro and other expansion questions
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 09:52:40 -0500

    I don't think this is needed for all code_style cases, only for node
    names?

You are right.

    in info I think that spaces shoube kept as is. Testing it, it seems
    to me that it is what makeinfo does?

Yes, makeinfo preserves spaces in the Info output.
In normal text (as opposed to @example or whatever), though, it wouldn't
be desirable for other output formats to do.  (And I don't think they
do.  I mean, the multiple space characters may be in the output file,
but they don't actually end up displaying multiple spaces in the output,
and that is good.)

    @include ".texi
    should really be ".texi even if in html it becomes ".

Yes, good point.

@image{ file }

    Should it be `file' or ` file '? I'd tend to favor `file' 

Agreed.  I think it is even somewhat expected that spaces are ignored
around Texinfo arguments in general.  Certainly something like

@include  foo.texi @c with two spaces

should not try to read a file named " foo.texi" (er, no quotes :), much less
" foo.texi " or
" foo.texi @c with two spaces".  It should just read "foo.texi".

    and the user can use @verb to have spaces. That would make @verb
    another acceptable @-command in file names, with the same meaning
    than in main ouput.

That sounds like a good approach in general.  Whether we can do it in
texinfo.tex I don't know, but it doesn't matter -- if people want to use
texinfo.tex, they need to restrict their filenames to normality anyway.
But we don't need to restrict the language.

Thanks,
k




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]