[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push? |
Date: |
Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:29:26 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 08:31:10AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Mark Polesky <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>> > +Use the @code{@@address@hidden@address@hidden command when referring to
>> > +individual language-specific tokens (keywords, commands,
>> > +engravers, scheme symbols, etc.) in the text. Ideally, a single
>> > address@hidden@@address@hidden@address@hidden block should fit within one
>> > line in the
>> > +PDF output.
>>
>> I have not followed Texinfo development closely, but I think that most
>> of the time, there were no line breaks in typewriter fonts done at all.
>
> Nope; we get line breaks in stuff like @code{\override
> Voice.textscript #'padding = #3}. :(
>
> I'm not certain whether this constitutes a bug with texinfo itself
> (i.e. I'm not going to argue about what the default formatting should
> be), but it would definitely be nice if we could make our backends
> (texi2pdf, texi2html) avoid newlines in such material. I can't
> remember if this made its way onto the tracker or not.
I seem to remember that in TeX hyphenation is more or less a font
property. If that is not the case, one can likely do something like
@iftex
@address@hidden@address@hidden }
@end iftex
in order to turn off hyphenation for the font selected for @code
passages, obviously for those backends implemented with TeX.
--
David Kastrup
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, (continued)
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, David Kastrup, 2010/09/24
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Mark Polesky, 2010/09/24
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, David Kastrup, 2010/09/25
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Mark Polesky, 2010/09/25
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, David Kastrup, 2010/09/25
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Carl Sorensen, 2010/09/25
Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Mark Polesky, 2010/09/25
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Carl Sorensen, 2010/09/25
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, David Kastrup, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Graham Percival, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Graham Percival, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, David Kastrup, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Graham Percival, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, David Kastrup, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Mark Polesky, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Graham Percival, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Mark Polesky, 2010/09/26
- Re: Doc fixes for \applyOutput ... ok to push?, Graham Percival, 2010/09/26