From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Nicolas Goaziou Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Using Org as the source format to generate org.texi Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:57:03 +0100 Message-ID: <87tvtlb2j4.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <878tb5axms.fsf@bzg.fr> <87371762r3.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87zi3dcrq1.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <83po49s36j.fsf@gnu.org> <876061ckk7.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <83h8plrygn.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1520878097 6709 195.159.176.226 (12 Mar 2018 18:08:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:08:17 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 12 19:08:12 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1evRrl-0001XD-6x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 19:08:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33732 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1evRtl-0006WT-Qx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 14:10:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38913) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1evRtb-0006Us-Ni for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 14:10:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1evRta-0001B5-QE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 14:10:03 -0400 Original-Received: from relay9-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.199]:53867) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1evRtW-000198-Mh; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 14:09:58 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 185.131.40.67 Original-Received: from saiph (unknown [185.131.40.67]) (Authenticated sender: admin@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay9-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 435F5FFA71; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:57:05 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ngz by saiph with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1evRh1-0000i7-W4; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:57:03 +0100 In-Reply-To: <83h8plrygn.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 12 Mar 2018 19:32:56 +0200") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 217.70.183.199 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:223653 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > I meant @key alone (that's why above I said "outside @kbd"). What > should happen with @kbd{@key{...}} is under debate, and I don't think > it's anywhere as important as supporting @key conveniently. AFAIK, > currently Org doesn't support @key, or at least all of its instances > in the Org's Texinfo manual were dropped when converting to Org. {{{kbd(...)}}} is both @kbd{...} and @key{...}. Anyway, it seems you did not answer to any of my questions. Or I may be misunderstanding, of course. Currently, {{{kbd(TAB)}}} is translated as @kbd{@key{TAB}}. Would it be better if it became @key{TAB} instead? Or is "supporting @key conveniently" something else? > It's up to you, but IMO underlining is not really appropriate. New > terminology should stand out like it does in other typesetting > systems, and slanted typeface does a good job in this case. > >> Org -> LaTeX and Org -> Texinfo -> LaTeX are going to produce different >> results and there is little hope they can converge at some point. >> I suggest to not bother too much about this. > > That's not what bothers me. Well, it seems to be, really. _text_ underlines "text" in other export back-ends than Texinfo. In Texinfo, it would become @dfn{...}. So, what apparently bothers you is the "Org -> LaTeX" or "Org -> HTML" both underline text when Texinfo makes it a definition. However _..._ is a definition only in Texinfo. Therefore, e.g., "Org -> LaTeX" is going to be different than "Org -> Texinfo -> LaTeX". In any case, let's forget about this, it was just an idea. One can still define and use {{{dfn(...)}}} when needed.