## docutils-develop — For developer discussions of the implementation.

You can subscribe to this list here.

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Jan Feb Mar Apr (5) May (27) Jun (22) Jul (72) Aug (82) Sep (86) Oct (138) Nov (100) Dec (62) Jan (122) Feb (147) Mar (92) Apr (82) May (101) Jun (153) Jul (37) Aug (34) Sep (46) Oct (46) Nov (6) Dec (38) Jan (64) Feb (81) Mar (36) Apr (194) May (329) Jun (272) Jul (68) Aug (74) Sep (150) Oct (57) Nov (62) Dec (63) Jan (78) Feb (30) Mar (137) Apr (78) May (54) Jun (122) Jul (72) Aug (110) Sep (80) Oct (75) Nov (125) Dec (79) Jan (100) Feb (15) Mar (41) Apr (67) May (30) Jun (11) Jul (14) Aug (22) Sep (20) Oct (14) Nov (11) Dec (15) Jan (17) Feb (16) Mar (35) Apr (21) May (33) Jun (50) Jul (12) Aug (7) Sep (2) Oct (6) Nov (5) Dec (2) Jan (14) Feb (20) Mar (35) Apr (9) May (57) Jun (21) Jul (42) Aug (4) Sep (13) Oct (76) Nov (40) Dec (55) Jan (26) Feb (15) Mar (3) Apr (67) May (32) Jun (39) Jul (59) Aug (31) Sep (59) Oct (64) Nov (21) Dec (10) Jan (21) Feb (3) Mar (116) Apr (33) May (9) Jun (28) Jul (21) Aug (23) Sep (146) Oct (70) Nov (31) Dec (57) Jan (33) Feb (22) Mar (11) Apr (21) May (51) Jun (47) Jul (35) Aug (26) Sep (25) Oct (34) Nov (61) Dec (51) Jan (75) Feb (31) Mar (26) Apr (16) May (24) Jun (24) Jul (31) Aug (46) Sep (36) Oct (28) Nov (37) Dec (21) Jan (16) Feb (56) Mar (31) Apr (44) May (45) Jun (29) Jul (38) Aug (18) Sep (12) Oct (16) Nov (21) Dec (11) Jan (13) Feb (14) Mar (28) Apr (7) May (72) Jun (33) Jul (21) Aug (1) Sep (6) Oct (14) Nov (18) Dec (22) Jan (23) Feb (108) Mar (76) Apr (114) May (60) Jun (9) Jul (8) Aug (9) Sep (42) Oct (9) Nov Dec (7) Jan (6) Feb (15) Mar (7) Apr May (33) Jun (3) Jul (19) Aug (12) Sep (6) Oct (16) Nov (17) Dec (125) Jan (66) Feb (98) Mar (29) Apr (32) May (63) Jun (98) Jul (26) Aug (33) Sep (9) Oct Nov Dec
S M T W T F S

1
(4)
2

3

4
(1)
5

6

7
(1)
8
(2)
9

10
(8)
11
(9)
12

13

14
(2)
15
(4)
16
(1)
17
(2)
18
(1)
19

20
(1)
21
(1)
22
(1)
23
(2)
24
(2)
25
(6)
26
(5)
27
(1)
28
(6)
29
(1)
30

Showing 8 results of 8

 Re: [Docutils-develop] Docutils 0.8.2 release? From: Paul Tremblay - 2011-11-10 16:17:41 Attachments: Message as HTML There is no agreement on how to handle citation references yet, so I don't see how docutils can accept the brackets syntax. As I've hinted at before, citation references can be quite tricky, and we need to think this through before committing to a syntax. Can I humbly suggest a term to talk about what we mean by the information that goes in the citation reference? I suggest we use the terminology from TEI since none other exists. TEI uses the term bibliScope. The citation reference refers to a bibliographic entry. But the citation must specify the "scope" of the entry. In most cases, this scope is simply a page number. But it can be a series of page numbers, or a range of page numbers, or reference to volumes, or an issue date, etc. On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote: > On 11/10/2011 3:20 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: > > I suggest to call it 0.9. > > > Before we approach 1.0, I urgently hope two problems will be addressed. > > > 1. Literal blocks should not be in a quote environment. > In any LaTeX writer, that means the quote environment > cannot be styled separately from the literal block environment. > This is obviously a bug, and it is already a serious problem > for those who use LaTeX slide writers. > > While I strongly advocate doing no environment wrapping, if there must > be wrapping, please introduce a docutils specific environment for this. > (I believe coding this would be trivial.) I have seen no objection to > this proposal. (Of course that does not mean none exists.) > > > 2. Please consider the proposal to allow citation references to > include braces-enclosed instance-specific text. For, example > [mycite{page=1}]_ and [mycite{page=2}]_ would both link to the > mycite citation. For now, writers would simply reproduce > the citation reference, but in the future, writers could handle > the instance-specific information in a variety of ways. > > > Thanks for considering these, > Alan > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > RSA(R) Conference 2012 > Save \$700 by Nov 18 > Register now > http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 > _______________________________________________ > Docutils-develop mailing list > Docutils-develop@... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/docutils-develop > > Please use "Reply All" to reply to the list. > 
 Re: [Docutils-develop] math in HTML From: Alan G Isaac - 2011-11-10 14:16:52 On 11/10/2011 3:33 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: > different HTML format > ===================== > > The html_strict writer generates valid > > XHTML + MathML:: > > "http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD/mathml2/xhtml-math11-f.dtd">; > > if the document contains math and math-output is MathML (which should be > kept as default for this writer). > > The writer currently resides in the sandbox. It could be moved to the core, > if there is agreement on this beeing sensible. I would find this by far the most useful approach. Cheers, Alan 
 Re: [Docutils-develop] Docutils 0.8.2 release? From: Alan G Isaac - 2011-11-10 14:13:33 On 11/10/2011 3:20 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: > I suggest to call it 0.9. Before we approach 1.0, I urgently hope two problems will be addressed. 1. Literal blocks should not be in a quote environment. In any LaTeX writer, that means the quote environment cannot be styled separately from the literal block environment. This is obviously a bug, and it is already a serious problem for those who use LaTeX slide writers. While I strongly advocate doing no environment wrapping, if there must be wrapping, please introduce a docutils specific environment for this. (I believe coding this would be trivial.) I have seen no objection to this proposal. (Of course that does not mean none exists.) 2. Please consider the proposal to allow citation references to include braces-enclosed instance-specific text. For, example [mycite{page=1}]_ and [mycite{page=2}]_ would both link to the mycite citation. For now, writers would simply reproduce the citation reference, but in the future, writers could handle the instance-specific information in a variety of ways. Thanks for considering these, Alan 
 [Docutils-develop] [ docutils-Patches-3434887 ] latex2e: Propagate figure align to image From: SourceForge.net - 2011-11-10 13:20:45 Patches item #3434887, was opened at 2011-11-08 02:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by milde You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=422032&aid=3434887&group_id=38414 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Pending >Resolution: Remind Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Kirill Smelkov (kirr79) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: latex2e: Propagate figure align to image Initial Comment: latex2e: Propagate figure align to image Previously figure alignment was not taken into account for embedding-in-fugure images -- images were always center-aligned. Fix it, by propagating figure's alignment to image, centering by default. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Günter Milde (milde) Date: 2011-11-10 05:20 Message: Thanks for the patch. Unfortunately, the problem at hand is more complex: It is quite common to have distinct alignment of images and figures, a left aligned image and caption inside a right aligned figure, say (this is the default of the HTML writer with :align: right). Currently, the only way to configure the alignment of an image inside a figure is via class arguments. While re-using the :align: argument for "image in figure" alignment in LaTeX seems an improvement over the current ignoring, it will prevent image alignment setting once aligned figures (with pargraph reflow) are supported. This should be discussed in the docutils list. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=422032&aid=3434887&group_id=38414 
 [Docutils-develop] [ docutils-Bugs-3419937 ] Inconsistent names of rst2*tex.py scripts From: SourceForge.net - 2011-11-10 12:58:21 Bugs item #3419937, was opened at 2011-10-06 23:04 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by milde You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=422030&aid=3419937&group_id=38414 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Pending >Resolution: Remind >Priority: 3 Private: No Submitted By: Jakub Wilk (jakub-wilk) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Inconsistent names of rst2*tex.py scripts Initial Comment: One of our (Debian) users noticed inconsistency in how rst2*tex.py are named. Output of rst2latex.py is meant to be consumed to by latex, so the name makes perfect sense. However, output of the other script, rst2xetex.py, is meant to be consumed by xelatex, rather than xetex as the name suggests. (This inconsistency doesn't bother my personally, I'm just relying the message.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Günter Milde (milde) Date: 2011-10-14 13:54 Message: I accnowledge that the naming is suboptimal and may contribute to the confusion about TeX engines vs. TeX macro extensions. Actually, the output of the xetex writer (and the rst2xetex.py front-end) is intended for use with either XeTeX or LuaTeX as engine and LaTeX macro extensions (command line commands for this are usually xelatex and lualatex). An enquiry at comp.text.tex for a short name for a "Unicode enabled, OpenFont using TeX engine" resulted in (amongst others) the proposal lxtex, so maybe the frontend should/could be renamed to rst2lxlatex.py. However: Would this be easy to remember and use? Would we need a backwards compatibility symlink? If yes, for how long? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=422030&aid=3419937&group_id=38414 
 [Docutils-develop] math in HTML From: Guenter Milde - 2011-11-10 08:33:58 Dear list, currently, HTML math output defaults to embedded MathML: :MathML: Embed math content as presentational MathML_. Pro: The W3C recommendation for math on the web. Self-contained documents (no JavaScript, no external downloads). Con: Docutil's latex2mathml converter supports only a small subset of LaTeX syntax. With the "html4css1" writer, the resulting HTML document does not validate, as there is no DTD for MathML + XHTML Transitional. However, MathML-enabled browsers will render it fine. To avoid generating invalid HTML, options are: a) a different math-output default b) a different HTML format. We need a consensus/decision on how to procede. Different math-output default ============================= Sensible alternatives for the html4css1 writer are: :MathJax: Format math for display with MathJax_, a JavaScript-based math rendering engine that uses HTML/CSS, JavaScript, and unicode fonts for high-quality typesetting that is scalable and prints at full resolution. Pro: Works 'out of the box' across multiple browsers and platforms. Supports a large subset of LaTeX math commands and constructs (see http://www.mathjax.org/docs/1.1/tex.html). Con: Requires an Internet connection or a local MathJax installation. :HTML: Format math in standard HTML enhanced by CSS rules Requires the math.css stylesheet (stored in the same installation-dependent directory as the default stylesheet If HTML output is chosen as default, the math.css stylesheet (~250 lines) would need to be either * included in the default style sheet * auto-loaded if a document needs math different HTML format ===================== The html_strict writer generates valid XHTML + MathML:: ; if the document contains math and math-output is MathML (which should be kept as default for this writer). The writer currently resides in the sandbox. It could be moved to the core, if there is agreement on this beeing sensible. Günter 
 Re: [Docutils-develop] Docutils 0.8.2 release? From: Guenter Milde - 2011-11-10 08:21:10 On 2011-11-10, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: quoted-printable --] > Since 0.8.1 release, there were some useful fixes (e.g. r7126, r7196). > Maybe Docutils 0.8.2 could be released? I would like to find a decision for the "math in HTML problem" first. Currently, with the default settings the html4css1 writer produces invalid HTML when math is used (see the separate thread). With a long awaited new directive, - reStructuredText "code" role and directive with syntax highlighting by Pygments_. - "code" option of the "include" directive. I suggest to call it 0.9. Günter 
 [Docutils-develop] Docutils 0.8.2 release? From: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis - 2011-11-10 02:33:46 Attachments: signature.asc Since 0.8.1 release, there were some useful fixes (e.g. r7126, r7196). Maybe Docutils 0.8.2 could be released? -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis `

Showing 8 results of 8