From owner-freebsd-doc Thu Aug 24 4: 0: 8 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 526F937B423 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id EAA86477; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:00:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008241100.EAA86477@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Cc: From: Rasmus Kaj Subject: Re: docs/20028: ASCII docs should reflect tags in the source Reply-To: Rasmus Kaj Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR docs/20028; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Rasmus Kaj To: Brooks Davis Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: docs/20028: ASCII docs should reflect tags in the source Date: 24 Aug 2000 12:53:02 +0200 >>>>> "BD" == Brooks Davis writes: [ About making some kind of visible emphasis in text-only output ] BD> I've looked into this a little today. It looks like creating a patch BD> which accomplishes this is pretty easy, but there are a few hoops to BD> jump though. First, w3m delibratly doesn't support tags at all. BD> It parses them, but throws them out. This could be corrected if we BD> wanted to do so. What is supported is which maps to which BD> in turn maps to . I've generated a patch so blah becomes BD> *blah* when -dump is specified. There's a good chance this is the wrong BD> way to do this, but it works for me. How would people suggest I BD> proceed? Should I implement Nik's suggestion of bold -> *bold* BD> and italics -> /italics/ or just what? My concern about Nik's BD> suggesion is that is used in a number of places including FAQ BD> Query's which I think it will look silly. I'm kinda thinking the right BD> thing to do may be to change the style sheets to translate to BD> and only dealing with in w3m. Well, *foo* looks like bold to some, but isn't, really. Same goes for /bar/ ... So, while I'm in favor of foo -> *foo* and bar -> _bar_ or /bar/, I think and really should be ignored when font controll isn't availible. Also, you may want to make it possible to disable this stuff in certain tags, for example, if you have an example command line that looks like: % *rm* /junk/ ... then there is bound to be some questions about that ... :-) That said, I agree with the basic suggestion that it would be nice to have e.g. render visibly in plain text. -- Rasmus Kaj ------------------------ rasmus@kaj.se - http://Raditex.se/~kaj/ \ If you're happy, you're successful \----------------------------------------------------- http://Raditex.se/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message