You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the EPUB 3.3 Webinar hosted by Booknet Canada, someone asked why the spec didn't have an index. It's a good question. I know that some other W3C specs do have indexes. Can ReSpec help with this?
We added one in 3.1 to account for having information spread across five specs, but it was removed earlier in this revision because it was a massive headache to maintain manually.
If you add an empty <section id="index">, respec will dump out a list of everything in dfn tags. Not sure how useful that is as an index, but it's an option.
Let us try to use the respec generated index. Now that we have extended the use of dfn-s to a number of terms that are not explicitly listed in the terminology section (xml elements) it may be useful. We can always remove it in the final spec if we feel it is useless...
What I don't like is that it will expose the same problems we had exporting the terms - no context for which grammar elements belong to and missing elements because of dfn name collisions.
Even putting data-dfn-for on (if we ever get that working) doesn't make things any clearer. You just get two context-less links:
I have just run it locally and, though not perfect, it may still be useful. Some styling trick may be necessary to turn the code elements red as elsewhere in the document (<a class="index-term" ...><code>...) but I think it is useful to have it in the spec even though it may indeed be problematic here and there... And it really doesn't costs us a penny:)
Activity
mattgarrish commentedon Apr 28, 2022
We added one in 3.1 to account for having information spread across five specs, but it was removed earlier in this revision because it was a massive headache to maintain manually.
If you add an empty
<section id="index">, respec will dump out a list of everything indfntags. Not sure how useful that is as an index, but it's an option.iherman commentedon Apr 29, 2022
Let us try to use the respec generated index. Now that we have extended the use of dfn-s to a number of terms that are not explicitly listed in the terminology section (xml elements) it may be useful. We can always remove it in the final spec if we feel it is useless...
mattgarrish commentedon Apr 29, 2022
What I don't like is that it will expose the same problems we had exporting the terms - no context for which grammar elements belong to and missing elements because of dfn name collisions.
Even putting
data-dfn-foron (if we ever get that working) doesn't make things any clearer. You just get two context-less links:iherman commentedon Apr 30, 2022
I have just run it locally and, though not perfect, it may still be useful. Some styling trick may be necessary to turn the code elements red as elsewhere in the document (
<a class="index-term" ...><code>...) but I think it is useful to have it in the spec even though it may indeed be problematic here and there... And it really doesn't costs us a penny:)