maven-doxia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Lundberg <>
Subject Re: Solving links and anchors
Date Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:00:42 GMT
Welcome back Lukas!

So, we seem to be in agreement that the handling of ids should be as it 
is right now. That is we allow these characters -_:.

That should mean that DOXIA-131 is solved right?

I suggest that we publish snapshots of what we have in svn now, to make 
sure that things are working OK. Then we release alpha-9 and decide how 
to handle backward-compatibility issues before beta-1. WDYT?

Lukas Theussl wrote:
> I also don't like disallowing dots in ids. Hhyphens ("-"), underscores 
> ("_"), colons (":"), and periods (".") are perfectly legal in ids 
> according to the html specs, I don't see any reason why doxia should 
> replace them. Underscores where used in the m1 xdoc plugin to replace 
> any illegal characters, which I think is better than just stripping 
> them, for readability reasons (think section titles). However, the use 
> of automatically constructed ids from section titles was discouraged in 
> the last version of the xdoc plugin [1] as it only led to trouble (which 
>  btw very much reminds me of our current ones, see MPXDOC-158 and 
> MPPDF-40 for related discussions).
> The root of the problem are the conventions used by aptconvert, and 
> apart from being undocumented, I don't really like them, so the question 
> is: how compatible do we want/have to stay with that?
> If I am not mistaken, the issue should be solved simply by requiring 
> that links to other documents have to start with './' or '../', as I 
> indicated at DOXIA-47. The only problem then is backward compatibility, 
> since currently this is rarely the case (eg the project reports page in 
> the site plugin [2] uses
> report.getOutputName() + ".html" );
> where report.getOutputName() doesn't start with './').
> However, in principle I think this is the way it should work (and always 
> should have in the first place), so maybe we try to clear that up and 
> document it for beta-1?
> Cheers,
> -Lukas
> [1] 

> [2] 

> Vincent Siveton wrote:
>> 2007/8/11, Dennis Lundberg <>:
>>> Hi
>>> As you probably saw on dev@maven we had some problems yesterday with
>>> links being rendered in the wrong way by doxia. I have made a temporary
>>> fix for this, but I feel that we need to do more to get a stable 
>>> solution.
>>> The issues which are related to these problems are
>>> -
>>> -
>>> My temporary fix reverses the logic. Instead of trying to see if a text
>>> is an "external link", I try to determine if a text is *not* an
>>> "internal link". With a few minor adjustments (see my comment on
>>> DOXIA-131) I think that this would be a more stable solution.
>>> What do you think?
>> Sounds goods.
>> IMHO, the ideal solution will be to not change the util encodeId()
>> (which respects HTML spec) to disallow dot.
>> Cheers,
>> Vincent
>>> -- 
>>> Dennis Lundberg

Dennis Lundberg

View raw message