Norman Walsh wrote:
> DocBook: The Definitive Guide is normative with respect to the
> processing expectations. The HTML stylesheets simply don't satisfy
> those expectations.
Issue 1. OK
>
> If you can think of a way to present the index in HTML that more
> closely matches the expectations, I'd be happy to implement it.
>
> The screw case is this one:
>
> <section xml:id="foo">
> <title>Some section title</title>
> <para>...</para>
> <para><indexterm xml:id="foo.idx"><primary>Foo</primary></indexterm>...</para>
> <para>...</para>
> <!-- 35 more paras -->
> <para>...</para>
> <para><indexterm xml:id="foo2.idx"><primary>Foo</primary></indexterm>...</para>
> </section>
>
> In the index, that's currently presented as:
>
> F
>
> Foo, _Some section title_
>
> where both terms have been collapsed into one. Representing both links
> with the same section title
Which seems way out wrong.
> I suppose they could be numbered sequentially throughout the document,
> but that'd be misleading too. Though maybe less so. At least "14" and
> "15" would be near each other in the text and "14" and "352" wouldn't
> be.
>
> Anyway, linking to the right place isn't hard, it's finding
> appropriate link text for the index that's hard.
Suggest putting the responsibility on the author?
If they choose to use
<primary>Foo</primary> then that is exactly what they'll get?
The 'wrongness' is then theirs to resolve?
Norm, you haven't commented on the fo case?
regards
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
