Hello
On 25 February 2013 16:34, Subhan Tindall <subhan.tind...@rentrakmail.com>wrote:
> I noticed you left out @inforef, was that by design? It actually does
> behave quite differently than other members of the @*ref family, and
> the more arguments it gets the more different it looks IE Here's an
> example with a full 5 arguments:
> REF *note Arg2: (Arg4)Lore Ipsum.
> INFOREF *note Arg2: (Arg3)Lore Ipsum Arg4, Arg5
I omitted @inforef, @uref, @url @email by design because they are
external links in an org file and can be processed differently.
Org Links only have 2 arguments at most (destination and description)
so the additional arguments are skipped as well.
Info links are format: [[info:<info-file>:<node>][description] or
[[info:<info-file>#<node>][description]] so can provide the 3 arguments
by splitting between file and node.
Regards
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Jonathan Leech-Pepin
> <jonathan.leechpe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > (Here are the attached files, forgot to add them)
> >
> >
> > On 25 February 2013 15:24, Jonathan Leech-Pepin
> > <jonathan.leechpe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> On 25 February 2013 14:01, Subhan Tindall <
> subhan.tind...@rentrakmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The point being that compiling .texinfo source into an Info file
> >>> treats references differently. For example:
> >>> (@pxref{my_node_name}). will compile just fine.
> >>> (@ref{my_node_name}). will not.
> >>
> >>
> >> Both work perfectly fine for me.
> >> makeinfo (GNU texinfo) 5.0
> >>
> >>>
> >>> There are also differences in case
> >>> (see v. See, note v. Note), and differences in output by ref type
> >>> depending on target output of file (info, DVI, HTML,...). For example,
> >>> @pxref generates different punctuation for typeset v. info files, @ref
> >>> does not generate a 'See ' in printed material while @xref does, etc.
> >>>
> >>> Although the differences are subtle, they really are not equivalent
> >>> and should not be treated as such.
> >>
> >>
> >> With a slight amount of work on the user's part, they can be made
> >> functionally equivalent on export.
> >>
> >> Using the two attached minimal .texi files (good-ref.texi is using
> >> @xref/@pxref as is preferred while ref.texi is using @ref with
> >> appropriate See/see added in the text) and disregarding filename
> >> differences (since they are noted in the info output) I get the
> >> following differences:
> >>
> >> > makeinfo --html --no-split good-ref.texi ref.texi
> >> 0 Diffs
> >>
> >> > makeinfo --docbook --no-split good-ref.texi ref.texi
> >> Filename ID appears in diff
> >>
> >> > makeinfo --xml --no-split good-ref.texi ref.texi
> >> Filename difference.
> >>
> >> Links are different since TexinfoML does still distinguish xref/pxref
> >> and ref in how they create the links.
> >>
> >> > makeinfo --no-split good-ref.texi ref.texi
> >>
> >> The info file does show the expected differences between the two
> >> documents, notably that the "@xref{}" becomes "*Note" while the
> >> equivalent "See @ref{}" becomes "See *note" with @pxref{}->*note vs
> >> see @ref{} -> see *note.
> >>
> >> However once they are viewed within the *info* buffer (C-u C-h i
> >> good-ref.info/ref-only.info) the lines in question are visually
> >> identical since *Note becomes "See" and *note becomes "see" if there
> >> is not already "see" present.
> >>
> >> I will not disagree that @ref, @pxref and @xref are subtly different,
> >> however with slight user intervention @ref can be used in the same
> >> above locations by simply replacing:
> >>
> >> @xref{} -> "See @ref{}"
> >> @pxref{} -> "see @ref{}"
> >>
> >> I had to compare these possible outcomes when working on the texinfo
> >> exporter. Since links are parsed before being included in their
> >> paragraphs, I did not have a way to obtain context and therefore
> >> attempt to guess (and be successful) at which type of reference was
> >> intended by a link in Org. Restricting it to @ref{} in all cases,
> >> even if it added a slight burden to the user (4 additional characters
> >> to type in Org) if they wanted to emulate @xref or @pxref was in my
> >> opinion the best choice.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jon
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Subhan Michael Tindall | Software Developer
> | s...@rentrakmail.com
> RENTRAK | www.rentrak.com | NASDAQ: RENT
>
