Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 10:09:01 -0700 From: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG (Bruce A. Mah) To: Ceri Davies <setantae@submonkey.net> Cc: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@FreeBSD.ORG>, doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Links within the Handbook Message-ID: <200205111709.g4BH91ZH072477@intruder.bmah.org> In-Reply-To: <20020511165845.GB1231@submonkey.net> References: <20020507161357.GA15017@submonkey.net> <20020507164915.GA55559@submonkey.net> <200205071654.g47GsjtE018079@intruder.bmah.org> <20020511165845.GB1231@submonkey.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If memory serves me right, Ceri Davies wrote: > > In addition, #3 is the only one that isn't broken for printed output. I > > have this dim recollection of someone spending cycles on the "relative > > URLs vs. printed output" problem before, but I am not sure what > > happened. > > Call me stupid, but how do ulinks affect printed output (I assume you mean > PDF) ? If you look at the PDF output from, say, the release documentation, you'll see various places where the url= attribute from a <ulink> element gets rendered. By default the URL goes in parentheses after the link text, but there's an option to do these as footnotes. So the problem with relative links is that this source... <ulink url="../../link.to.somewhere">link text</ulink> ...gets turned into something like this on the printed page: link text (../../link.to.somewhere) A relative link from a piece of paper makes no sense whatsoever. :-) Bruce. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200205111709.g4BH91ZH072477>