[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: broken links for "next section in reading order"
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: broken links for "next section in reading order" |
Date: |
Fri, 21 May 2010 16:14:07 +0100 |
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Francisco Vila <address@hidden> wrote:
> 2010/5/21 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
>> However, in some cases this
>> *will* change the html splitting in a way that isn't appropriate.
>
> My understanding (you know where does it come from :-) is that only
> numbered sections produce splitting. So, no danger of new files
> everywhere as long as nodes are unnumberedsubsubsec.
My understanding is that I never take anything that involves our build
system or texi2html for granted.
Cheers,
- Graham
PS we have some @section and @subsection and probably even
@subsubsection commands without a node; hence my warning about not
blindly adding @node everywhere. It's not a hard task to figure out
where to add them and test it out, but it *does* require testing and
whatnot.
- broken links for "next section in reading order", Mark Polesky, 2010/05/20
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Francisco Vila, 2010/05/20
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", James Lowe, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Francisco Vila, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Graham Percival, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Francisco Vila, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Graham Percival, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Francisco Vila, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order",
Graham Percival <=
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Jean-Charles Malahieude, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Mark Polesky, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Graham Percival, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", James Lowe, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Graham Percival, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Mark Polesky, 2010/05/21
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Graham Percival, 2010/05/23
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Trevor Daniels, 2010/05/24
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Mark Polesky, 2010/05/24
- Re: broken links for "next section in reading order", Graham Percival, 2010/05/24