Re: top node in html cross references

Hello all,

the code already contains one exception: map "Top" to "index.html"
the proposal is to add a second one: map "Index" to "index_.html"

I support this sugestion.

> > The Top node should be the first node, but a node named index may appear 
> > anywhere in the document. If they appear on the same file it doesn't reflect
> > the organization of the manual.
> 
> that the organization of the document is harmed if it is produced as
> a single large HTML file (under --no-split)?

The manual says: "For HTML output, each file contains one node"
The above suggestion makes makeinfo to keep this rule better.
Or should we delete this sentence from the manual?

> > Another reason, which may be of less interest is that I think that the
> > Top node is a special node and thus it should be much better to keep
> > it in its own file.
> 
> There are complications here, and we've hit them before.  There may be
> no Top node, or it could have a name other than "Top".  I think these
> problems make any special handling of Top very difficult.  Given that
> the benefits are (IMHO) small, I don't recommend that.

It seems that you are proposing to remove the first exception ("Top" to
"index.html") instead of adding the second one ("Index" to "index_.html").
Though this would be theoretically pure situation, it would bring much
confusion.
[ But you may be true that the hardcoded "Top" in the first exception
is to be replaced by something more general, in case the top node has
another name.  (I'm not able to judge this.)
In case there is no top node, no index.html should be created. ]

If we decided to keep the first exception, I wouldn't see any relevance
of the problems you mention to the question whether the second exception
is added or not.

Have a nice day,
	Stepan Kasal
_______________________________________________
Texinfo home page: http://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/
[email protected]
http://ff0.org/mailman/listinfo/texinfo-pretest