Hi Karl.
> So, Texinfo @parts do not map to Docbook. Not surprising. Such is
> life. To get parts in your Docbook output, all I can think of is the
> useless "hack it in by hand" approach (e.g., throw comments into the
> source and post-process them to create the necessary <part>/related
> elements). Sorry.
Actually, @docbook would mostly solve this. But I would need a way to
tell makeinfo "close off any open sections / chapters that you have, NOW".
Right now if I use @docbook, I'm getting:
<part>
introductory blah blah here
</section> <-------- these are from what came before the part
</preface>
<chapter> ...
</part>
> I created the Texinfo @part command as independent from the sectioning
> structure because it had to be that way for compatibility, etc.
> Creating a second kind of part command that *is* part of the sectioning
> structure sounds like an awful lot of work for no essential gain.
Suppose we don't include it in the structure and just add some commands
that are mostly "noise"?
@partnum I
@part Title For Part I
....
@partend
texinfo.tex would print "Part I" using the argument to @partnum, and ignore
@partend. makeinfo upon seeing @partnum or @part would close off whatever
is open and generate the right tags; @partend generates </part>.
That seems straightforward to me, doesn't break any backward compatibility,
and I hope doesn't impinge too much on the structure of the document or what
makeinfo has to do when generating docbook.
Worst case, I can live with the manual stuff. I prefer to have as much smarts
as possible in the tools instead of in hacked-together scripts. And if DocBook
is to be supported, this would help.
And, since I'm asking, makeinfo should generate <partintro> ... </partintro>
tags around any material after the part title and the first <chapter>.
Once again, thanks for listening. I appreciate both that and the current,
much more advanced, state of DocBook generation in the texinfo tools.
Arnold
