Re: [docbook-apps] Re: Request For Clarification: Indexterm processingin auto-index generation.

[Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>]

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