Hi. I agree that there's an impedance mismatch here between Texinfo and DocBook. That makes it harder to deal with than I would like, too. I really DON'T enjoy making the lives of the Texinfo maintainers miserable... :-( (Yes Karl, I hear you snorting in the back there... :-)
> On 6 April 2016 at 22:00, Karl Berry <k...@freefriends.org> wrote: > > <index role="cp"></index> > > > > How can it be correct to omit output from the @node and @unnumbered? If I wrapped them in @ifnotdocbook ... :-) > > Docbook cannot know the name I want to give to my index. And the whole > > node tree would be screwed up. And what if there is other text in the > > node besides the @printindex? I don't get it. Not that it's my > > business any more ... -k > > That's exactly what I thought. > > .... > @node Concept Index > @unnumbered Index > > aaaaa > > @printindex cp > > bbbbb > > @bye > > What should the output be? Three separate chapters? Beats me. I understand the issue. > Does invalid DocBook output cause problems with validation? Yes. The <index> comes out inside a chapter and the docbook doesn't validate. > Would it be better to remove the <index> output completely and have no > output for an index? Most likely. The <index/> needs to be after the previous </chapter> closing tag and I don't see any way to force that. I can think of something ugly like: @ifnotdocbook @node Concept Index @unnumbered Index @printindex cp @end ifnotdocbook @ifdocbook @bookcontentdone @c flush out chapters and appendices @printindex cp @end ifdocbook @bye Hmm... That's almost reasonable. :-) Thanks, Arnold