From: Tony Cebzanov <tonycpsu@gm...> - 2010-09-22 19:59:16
I find myself wanting to do hyperlinks to text versions of docs from
text versions of docs, and to HTML versions from HTML versions. This
seems like a pretty standard request, and it appears to have come up on
the list before:
These threads led me to this to-do item:
So, it looks like the feature is still missing. In the threads above, a
lot of good ideas were proposed, but everyone seemed to have different
opinions on whether any of them were worth implementing, and the threads
died off without any sort of consensus as to how to do it.
Maybe my search-fu is weak, but I haven't been able to find any more
recent threads discussing this topic. Has anyone given this more
thought? Or is there perhaps some other feature that's been added to
reStructuredText in the last five or so years that could be used as a
workaround? I *really* don't want to do some goofy post-processing step
just to make .txt docs link to .txt and .html docs link to .html, but
for what I'm doing, it is really important I be able to do it somehow.
From: David Goodger <goodger@py...> - 2010-09-22 20:23:09
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 01:12, Tony Cebzanov <tonycpsu@...> wrote:
> Has anyone given this more thought?
Plenty of thought, not enough implementation.
> Or is there perhaps some other feature that's been added to
> reStructuredText in the last five or so years that could be used as a
Not that I know of.
> I *really* don't want to do some goofy post-processing step
> just to make .txt docs link to .txt and .html docs link to .html, but
> for what I'm doing, it is really important I be able to do it somehow.
What's the point of .txt linking? Just so the human reader can see ".txt"?
David Goodger <http://python.net/~goodger>
From: Tony Cebzanov <tonycpsu@gm...> - 2010-09-22 20:58:57
On 9/22/10 4:22 PM, David Goodger wrote:
> Plenty of thought, not enough implementation.
OK, but if nobody agreed on an approach, implementation would be
premature, right? I'd be happy to help implement something if there was
general agreement on the way to do it that isn't too complex but still
does what most people would want.
> What's the point of .txt linking? Just so the human reader can see ".txt"?
Sort of. I've got a software project with a main README-ish file and
some subordinate docs for each component. With the readme in regular
text format, I would just say "look in foo/README.txt for more info
about foo." With ReST, it makes sense to use a hyperlink. But, I don't
want to link to the .txt version when the docs are published in HTML,
nor do I want to make the link point to HTML files when people are
reading the file as plain text.
Does that make sense?