On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 02:51:20PM +0100, Daniel Cerqueira wrote: > I am sorry about my observations about you, the Texinfo team, hurting > the whole Free Software movement. I agree that this is not the truth. > > I know that you don't want to quickly release my patch when you are now > closing a Texinfo version. So I am sending this email, to see if my > patches are accepted on a next release, or urge you to make the > generation of EPUB by Texinfo, in compliance with the EPUB standard.
I will look into the issue as soon as I am done with the Texinfo 7.1.1 release which is hopefully not too far away. I am really only able or willing to spend a few hours a week working on Texinfo and so when other things come up, progress is delayed. > Been the compliance done with CSS, or maybe not using the Texinfo HTML > generator, and creating a dedicated EPUB's XML generator. In order for > the index table border to be in compliance. I believe it should be fairly easy to override the border attribute for EPUB output only, for the 7.2 release. After that we could revise Texinfo indices not to use <table> at all (as said in previous email by Per Bothner) which would ameliorate the issue. In terms of implementation all we would have to do is set something when the init file epub3.pm runs that would be checked by the code in HTML.pm - some kind of internal variable. > Regardind the dcterms:modified, you may want to increase complexity, > trying to make Texinfo builds reproducible.... For me that is a lost > cause since the pdftex does not, and won't, make PDF builds reproducible > either (and Texinfo depends on (La)TeX). I am not an expert on reproducible builds and you make a valid point about PDF builds not being reproducible. It appears that pdftex obeys the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH variable and we could do the same for texi2any for EPUB (as mentioned by Werner Lemberg on this list). > I would like to discuss your opinions in regard of the EPUB compliance, > to see where you stand, and to summarize which ideas do you think is the > best approach, for the next release. I am in favour of automatic compliance with no further action needed on the part of the user of texi2any as it seems that this should be easy to achieve, although I would like to take more time to understand Patrice's view on this matter.
