Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 17, 2021. It is now read-only.

Process linebreaks and rules for xhtml #93

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ShadowKyogre
Copy link

I'm not sure why the rules for br and hr are missing from the xhtml xsl file. Any input on this would be appreciated.

@elextr
Copy link
Contributor

elextr commented Apr 15, 2016

Probably because its missing by accident and hasn't been noticed because 1) most users generate xhtml by asciidoc itself and/or 2) those using the toolchain don't use hard breaks or horizontal rules

@ShadowKyogre
Copy link
Author

Aaah, oki. I mainly use the xhtml generation (along with some python scripting to inline the css) for making *.odts and *.rtfs. (<- which by far, is more reliable for me atm to produce such files)

@ShadowKyogre
Copy link
Author

Commenting on this because I was wondering if I needed to do anything else with it before it's merged.

@ShadowKyogre
Copy link
Author

Phone accidentally clicked on close, sorry about that.

@elextr
Copy link
Contributor

elextr commented May 15, 2016

Two things

  1. checks are failing
  2. somebody other than the PR author needs to determine which toolchains and which output formats it affects (eg does it affect epub?) and test them all

@ShadowKyogre
Copy link
Author

ShadowKyogre commented May 15, 2016

@ p1: Understandable. The test failed here (python 2.6 only failure due to python syntax I didn't touch): https://travis-ci.org/asciidoc/asciidoc/jobs/130333555#L32 . I'll close and reopen again to run the test again when that's fixed since it's outside the domain of this PR

@ p2: Also understandable.

@ShadowKyogre
Copy link
Author

ShadowKyogre commented May 15, 2016

That or I prolly need to rebase against master again.

Hm... the line it's complaining about is present in master too: https://github.com/asciidoc/asciidoc/blob/master/filters/latex/latex2img.py#L227

That's odd. I'll reclose and open one more time to see if it's consistently happening.

EDIT: Checks passed this time. Peculiar.

@elextr
Copy link
Contributor

elextr commented May 15, 2016

All the Python 2.6 checks on all PRs (well the ones I checked anyway) seem to be complaining about that line, but it doesn't seem to make them fail. You must have just been (un)lucky :)

@Minoru
Copy link

Minoru commented Nov 2, 2017

most users generate xhtml by asciidoc itself

Can someone elaborate on this? I thought that meant doing

$ asciidoc -b docbook input.txt
$ xsltproc --nonet /etc/asciidoc/docbook-xsl/xhtml.xsl input.xml > output.html

instead of

$ a2x -f xhtml input.txt

but obviously both will use the same XSL and result in the same HTML. (I actually checked—it is indeed so.)

somebody other than the PR author needs to determine which toolchains and which output formats it affects (eg does it affect epub?) and test them all

Grepping for xhtml.xsl shows that noone includes it, so editing the file shouldn't affect any output formats other than xhtml. Not sure what's meant by "toolchains" here (I'm an AsciiDoc newbie.)

@elextr
Copy link
Contributor

elextr commented Nov 3, 2017

Can someone elaborate on this? I thought that meant doing

asciidoc -b xhtml11 file.txt
asciidoc file.txt

generate xhtml from ASCIIDOC directly, no toolchain needed.

Grepping for xhtml.xsl shows that noone includes it,

Thats because its the top level .xsl, it includes the others, and just to fool ya a2x generates its filename programatically so it doesn't appear there either. 😁

@aerostitch
Copy link
Contributor

@ShadowKyogre It seems this repo will no longer accept PR as the latest release has been cut a while ago but https://github.com/asciidoc/asciidoc-py3 would.
If you still want this PR integrated in asciidoc, do you mind pushing it there please?
Once done I think you can close this one.
Thanks!

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants