On 6/15/13 11:55 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I'm curious about how you manage to factor out / abstract away the
niggling details of LaTeX, like the use of ".\ " after an abbreviation
(to make it produce only an inter-word space, as opposed to the extra
space at the end of a sentence),
ABBRDOT = .\$(SPACE)
m-dash
MDASH = ---
vs. n-dash
NDASH = --
, etc., some of which
are quite specific to LaTeX but are quite necessary if you're going for
print-quality typesetting. And what about embedded \footnote's?
FOOTNOTE = \footnote{$0}
Section
references?
SECREF = \ref{sec:$0}
Do you have macros for all of them?
Yah. All of the above would go into a latex.ddoc macros file. Then the
html.ddoc file would contain things like
ABBRDOT = .$(SPACE)
MDASH = —
etc.
Does it make it a bit
cumbersome to type?
Most likely, but this is the price to pay for supporting multiple
formats. Then, LaTeX wasn't exactly designed for ease of typing, so the
marginal cumbersomeness shouldn't be high.
I do have to process the ddoc before giving it to the compiler in
order to generate the table of contents and index macros (since you
can't generate those with just macros), but since I'm using a D script
to do the build, that was actually pretty easy.
[...]
Isn't \tableofcontents enough to auto-generate the table of contents? Or
are you talking about doing that for HTML output?
Yah, all outputs should have TOCs and such.
Andrei
