[ docbook-Bugs-1047852 ] informal.object template refers to equation

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Bugs item #1047852, was opened at 2004-10-15 17:20
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by piater
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=373747&aid=1047852&group_id=21935

Category: DocBook XSL
Group: Print/FO/PDF
Status: Closed
Resolution: Wont Fix
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Justus Piater (piater)
Assigned to: Michael Smith (xmldoc)
Summary: informal.object template refers to equation

Initial Comment:
I noticed that equation properties are not taken into
account when tex-notation equations are generated for
PassiveTeX. If I'm not mistaken, this is due to an
apparently long-standing bug in the informal.object
template (fo/formal.xsl): it refers to 'equation' and
"equation.properties" instead of 'informalequation' and
"informalequation.properties". Simply replacing the
former two with the latter two should fix the bug, if I
understand correctly that equations are never treated
by this template at all but rather by formal.object.
This fix seems to work for me with docbook-xsl-1.61.3
(later versions are incompatible with PassiveTeX - if
you want to maintain compatibility, let me know, and
I'll file tons of bug reports); the bug is still
present in 1.66.1.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Justus Piater (piater)
Date: 2004-11-17 09:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=635855

You're right, I wasn't careful. The bug exists as described
in the stylesheets Version 1.61.3 (that I still use because
later versions no longer work with PassiveTeX). When I
verified against 1.66.1, I failed to scroll down: The top of
the template looks identical, but then there follows, as you
described, a sequence of informal...properties that did not
exist in 1.61.3.
Would it be appropriate to set "Resolution" to something
else, say "Out of Date"? This is not a bug that won't be
fixed; rather, I reported a bug that no longer exists.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Michael Smith (xmldoc)
Date: 2004-11-16 19:15

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=118135

Hi Justus,

I finally had some time to check on this.

You wrote

> I noticed that equation properties are not taken into
> account when tex-notation equations are generated for
> PassiveTeX.

I don't know what that means.

> If I'm not mistaken, this is due to an apparently
> long-standing bug in the informal.object template
> (fo/formal.xsl):

You are mistaken, I think. What you're seeing in that
template is there by design, not by accident.

> it refers to 'equation' and "equation.properties"
> instead of 'informalequation' and
> "informalequation.properties".

I think you must not have looked at that template very
carefully. Take another look. It refers to equation and
equation.properties _in addition to_ informalequation
and informalequation.properties


> Simply replacing the former two with the latter two
> should fix the bug, if I understand correctly that
> equations are never treated by this template at all
> but rather by formal.object.

It actually introduces a bug because it alters the
intended behavior of the stylesheets.

If you'd still like to have this fixed, please file a
new issue with a description of exactly what problem
you're seeing.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Michael Smith (xmldoc)
Date: 2004-10-21 19:31

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=118135

Justus,

I will look into the informal.object problem.

About making fixes for Passivetex compatibility: If you
have fixes you've already put together, please file
them using the Patches tracker -

 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=add&group_id=21935&atid=373749

Please make sure to:

  - set the Category to "DocBook XSL FO"

  - upload the patch using the file-upload form at the bottom
    of the page; IMPORTANT: make sure to click the checkbox
    after where it says "Check to Upload and Attach a File:"

  - create your patch using "diff -u" (unified diff format)

Also, note that no change is going to be considered if
it degrades the quality of the output from XEP. What I
mean is, we won't make a change to get things working
with Passivetex if it means disabling certain FO
features just because Passivetex doesn't support them.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=373747&aid=1047852&group_id=21935