Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 15:01:36 -0300
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>,
	Markus Winand <markus.winand@winand.at>,
	Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: House style for DocBook documentation?
Message-ID: <201901211801.sqxe6hoejajg@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <5C45F74D.9040908@anastigmatix.net>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-1013-2c1e88
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-Jan-21, Chapman Flack wrote:

> But the point's well taken that in /printed output/, that's of no use.
> Which is, in a sense, an inconsistency: in one format, you can follow the
> links, while in another, you're out of luck.
> 
> Maybe a simpler transform for printed output, rather than collecting
> all URLs into one section at the back, would just be to follow any
> <ulink> that has link text with a <footnote> containing the same ulink
> without the link text, so it shows the URL, and that would be right at
> the bottom of the same 'page'.

Of course, the text would also be clickable, right?  I think putting the
URL in a footnote is good in that case; it works both on screen and on
paper, which should alleviate JD's concerns.

> I wouldn't think it important to apply the same treatment when making HTML.

Right, only PDF.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services