Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support the -b flag for specific doc type #527

Closed
xcoulon opened this issue Mar 30, 2020 · 7 comments
Closed

Support the -b flag for specific doc type #527

xcoulon opened this issue Mar 30, 2020 · 7 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@xcoulon
Copy link
Member

xcoulon commented Mar 30, 2020

so we can have -b manpage as an alternative to specifying the doctype in the document itself, with

:doctype: manpage
@xcoulon xcoulon added this to the v0.3.1 milestone Mar 30, 2020
@xcoulon xcoulon modified the milestones: v0.4.0, backlog Mar 30, 2020
@gdamore
Copy link
Collaborator

gdamore commented Jun 16, 2020

Actually -b is for the backend, -d is for the doc type.

I'm fixing the support for -b as part of the fix for #601

@gdamore gdamore self-assigned this Jun 16, 2020
@gdamore
Copy link
Collaborator

gdamore commented Jun 16, 2020

(And for the curious, yes, manpage is a possible backend for asciidoctor -- it is distinct from the doctype manpage. The backend manpage emits TROFF sequences. The doctype man page affects the rendering of the title section.)

@gdamore gdamore modified the milestones: backlog, v0.5.0 Jun 16, 2020
@xcoulon
Copy link
Member Author

xcoulon commented Jun 16, 2020

Actually -b is for the backend, -d is for the doc type.

ah right 🤦‍♂️

I'm fixing the support for -b as part of the fix for #601

I know it's a minor change but it could be addressed in a separate PR (easier to track the change afterwards)

@gdamore
Copy link
Collaborator

gdamore commented Jun 16, 2020

It seems kind of linked -- impossible for anyone to access the XHTML output (short of writing a program to do so) otherwise.

@xcoulon
Copy link
Member Author

xcoulon commented Jun 16, 2020

well, can't you fix this issue here first, and then use it for the XHTML output issue?

@gdamore
Copy link
Collaborator

gdamore commented Jun 16, 2020

I suppose I could have, but I did the development in the other direction. I'll submit the unified PR. If it bothers you greatly, it doesn't look too bad to split apart.

@gdamore
Copy link
Collaborator

gdamore commented Jun 18, 2020

This was fixed with the merge of #618 .

@gdamore gdamore closed this as completed Jun 18, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants