Re: [Docutils-develop] Figure references

[David G. <go...@us...>]

Engelbert Gruber wrote:
> i am willing to give support for real problems, meaning not the
> pathologic test.txt.

I've got to call you on this one.  "Pathological"?!?  That is a gross
misrepresentation.  The tools/test.txt file is pretty complete (*not*
100% though), but there's nothing in it that can't be found elsewhere.
Certainly nothing pathological!

> sorry my time is limited and there are so much possibilities.

Join the club. ;-)

> maybe we schould split test.txt, so one could get a compliance page,
> which construct works how good with which writer.

tools/test.txt *is* the compliance file, the only one we've got.  I
don't see a need for a weakened compliance test.

As I've said before, to get out of the sandbox the LaTeX Writer
doesn't have to handle every construct perfectly, but it *does* have
to handle every construct without (a) crashing or (b) silently
omitting data.  If the Writer can't handle a particular construct,
have it say so explicitly ("**X Not Implemented Yet**"), *and* have it
output a simpler form, such as the string returned by the
``.astext()`` node method.  I earlier objected to the presence of many
Writer/Visitor methods containing only "pass", which is not
acceptable.

    Errors should never pass silently.
    Unless explicitly silenced.

-- 
David Goodger  <go...@us...>  Open-source projects:
  - Python Docutils: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/
    (includes reStructuredText: http://docutils.sf.net/rst.html)
  - The Go Tools Project: http://gotools.sourceforge.net/