[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Links in print and online
From: |
Gavin Smith |
Subject: |
Links in print and online |
Date: |
Sat, 26 Nov 2016 17:45:34 +0000 |
On 25 November 2016 at 15:40, Assaf Gordon <address@hidden> wrote:
> IMHO, the distinction between "print" and "online" should be refined, as both
> HTML and PDF can be used for printing and for online viewing. The distinction
> should be between formats/displays/interfaces that support embedded linking,
> and those that don't.
> Additionally, with modern HTML capabilities we can also know if it being
> viewed on screen or being printed.
>
> I'd like to be able to do the following. Perhaps it's already possible, I'm
> not sure how.
>
> I want to be able to write something like:
>
> The @option{-E} option turns on @linkref{extended regular expression} mode
> @printref(extended regular expression}.
>
> Where "@linkref" would generate an embedded link, with the text being
> "extended regular expression" and look natural as part of the sentence. It
> should work in HTML, PDF when viewed on screen, and all other interactive
> formats.
> When printed, it should just be the text "extended regular expression"
> without additional text (e.g. no "see" or pages) - effectively looking like
> normal text and losing its cross-ref attributes.
>
> And "@printref" is something that generates a stand-alone expression, with
> parenthesis, suitable for inclusion in printed material (such as PDF, or HTML
> with special media=print tags), and it should be something like "(see
> Extended Regular Expressions, Section X, Page Y)".
I've got another idea: what about adding an option to miss out all the
page numbers in cross-references in the TeX output in case someone
wants to produce a PDF they only want to read online? That could allow
you to get a link in a PDF file like you want.
In my opinion, there are enough cross-reference commands already
(maybe too many). Handling the case you mention for PDF files doesn't
justify adding more, in my opinion, as PDF is not a very important
output format (I would guess that Texinfo manuals aren't printed on
paper very much, and would be mostly read as HTML or Info files).
- Links in print and online,
Gavin Smith <=