Re: [R-pkg-devel] Issue with HTML version of manual

[Ivan Krylov]

В Thu, 28 Apr 2022 03:59:01 -0700
Arkajyoti Saha  пишет:

> Please let me know if this attachment works,

It worked for me, but didn't work for anyone else: R-package-devel
strips out most kinds of attachments. Is this the same file?
https://github.com/ArkajyotiSaha/RandomForestsGLS/blob/main/man/RFGLS_predict.Rd

It looks like Tidy-HTML5 disagrees with tools::toHTML/tools::Rd2HTML
about validity of some attributes: according to the HTML5 standard (e.g.
), these
HTML element attributes must be replaced by CSS properties now.

I think that tools::toHTML/tools::Rd2HTML will have to be changed to
silence these warnings. Nothing you could fix on your end.

-- 
Best regards,
Ivan

__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Issue with HTML version of manual

[Uwe Ligges]

On 28.04.2022 13:19, Ivan Krylov wrote:

В Thu, 28 Apr 2022 03:59:01 -0700
Arkajyoti Saha  пишет:


Please let me know if this attachment works,


It worked for me, but didn't work for anyone else: R-package-devel
strips out most kinds of attachments. Is this the same file?
https://github.com/ArkajyotiSaha/RandomForestsGLS/blob/main/man/RFGLS_predict.Rd

It looks like Tidy-HTML5 disagrees with tools::toHTML/tools::Rd2HTML
about validity of some attributes: according to the HTML5 standard (e.g.
), these
HTML element attributes must be replaced by CSS properties now.

I think that tools::toHTML/tools::Rd2HTML will have to be changed to
silence these warnings. Nothing you could fix on your end.



Indeed, I installed a new tidy version which complains more than former 
ones. We have to fix this in R. In the meantime, packages that got 
auto-rejected only for this reasons should have been processed. If yours 
not, please simply resubmit.


Best,
Uwe Ligges

__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Two problems with fda

[Avraham Adler]

Hello, Spencer.

I am solely on Windows, so I am not familiar with the workflow you
need, but I have found the following posts which discuss tlmgr in the
context of a Github action. Perhaps they can provide you with insight:
[1], [2].

Hope that helps!

Avi

[1] 
https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/551383/cant-run-tex-lives-tlmgr-in-a-github-action
[2] https://github.com/xu-cheng/texlive-action

On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 2:28 PM Duncan Murdoch  wrote:
>
> On 28/04/2022 10:17 a.m., Spencer Graves wrote:
> > Hi, Duncan et al.:
> >
> >
> > I passed Duncan's suggestions to Jim Ramsay, who implemented
> > something -- not sure what -- and "fda_6.0.3.tar.gz has been built for
> > Windows and will be published within 24 hours in the corresponding CRAN
> > directory"!  (Thanks, Duncan!)
>
> You're welcome.
>
> > My attempts to fix ".github/workflows/R-CMD-check.yaml" have so far
> > been unsuccessful:
> >
> >
> > https://github.com/JamesRamsay5/fda/commit/3dd1938d95055ed798a8b6caebcfe0eb8a03668b
>
> Line 50 in that update looks wrong.  It might make sense to have "tlmgr
> --version" just after line 53, indented like lines 54 and 55.
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>
> >
> > For me currently, yaml = "yet another misunderstood language" ;-)
> > And I've misplaced Yihui Xie's recommendations on how to ask for help.
> > I remember he suggested submitting a question first to Stack Exchange or
> > Stack Overflow or ..., but I can't find those recommendations, so I
> > thought I'd here thank Avraham Adler  and
> > everyone else who has considered replying to this question, hoping that
> > someone can help me take the next step.
> >
> >
> > Thanks again,
> > Spencer Graves
> >
> >
> > On 4/26/22 11:46 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> >> On 25/04/2022 8:24 p.m., Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> >>...
> >>>
> >>> \value{
> >>>  These functions return either a standard \code{fRegress} fit
> >>> object or
> >>>  or a model specification:
> >>>  \item{The \code{fRegress} fit object case:}{
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Aha, in a \value{} section, bare \items are supposed to mark components
> >>> of the value, so they are automatically code.  I think the fix for this
> >>> is to make it an explicit \describe list:
> >>>
> >>> \value{
> >>>  These functions return either a standard \code{fRegress} fit
> >>> object or
> >>>  or a model specification:
> >>>  \describe{
> >>>\item{The \code{fRegress} fit object case:}{
> >>>
> >>>  ... eventually ...
> >>>
> >>>  }
> >>
> >> An even simpler fix:  don't mark the section title as an \item, i.e.
> >> write as
> >>
> >> \value{
> >>  These functions return either a standard \code{fRegress} fit object or
> >>  or a model specification.
> >>
> >>  The \code{fRegress} fit object case:
> >>
> >>
> >>  \item{field}{description  }
> >>
> >>
> >> Duncan Murdoch
>
> __
> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel

__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel