[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vaxuum::online_bookbuilding

Title:Online Bookbuilding
Notice:This conference is write-locked: see note 1.3.
Moderator:VAXUUM::UTT
Created:Fri Aug 12 1988
Last Modified:Mon Jul 15 1991
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:440
Total number of notes:2134

344.0. "Wishlist: user-defined text for hotspots" by CRAYON::GENT (There is no poetry without madness -- Democritus) Fri Jun 01 1990 13:55

    I realize the engineering group has their hands full, but...
    
    Since I don't remember seeing an official request for this
    yet and I could really use it in the book I'm currently writing 
    (why else?)... I would like to propose the following wishlist item 
    for DOCUMENT:
    
    
    	Support for user-defined text in hotspots. 
    
    	Currently, hotspots are restricted to the text supplied by the 
    	<REFERENCE> tag. That is:
    
    		1.  A topic number ("Table 2-1" for example)
    
    		2.  The title of the cross-referenced item
    
    		3.  Both of the above.
    
    	In text, I sometimes make a reference to a topic that I would
    	like to cross-reference, but do not want to litter the text
    	with parenthetical statements such as "(See Section so-and-so for
    	more details)". It would be extremely useful if I could simply
    	turn phrases within the text into hotspots. Something like
    	the following:
    
    		<P>
    		This chapter discusses <HOTSPOT>(cat_section\cats) and
    		<HOTSPOT>(dog_section\dogs) and
    		<HOTSPOT>(anatomy_section\how to tell them apart).
    		In addition, <REFERENCE>(animal_noises_appendix)
    		discusses methods for distinguishing different breeds
    		by sound.
    
    	For bookreader output the phrases "cats", "dogs", and
    	"how to tell them apart" become hotspots. For hardcopy
    	output, the phrases simply appear normally as text.
    
    	I've used a hypothetical tag (<HOTSPOT>) for illustration.
    	But I suspect the same results could be implemented through
    	the <REFERENCE> tag. For example, adding a new keyword and
    	a 3rd optional argument:
    
    	   <REFERENCE>(anatomy_section\USERDEFINED\how to tell them apart)
    
    I realize that I can write around the current restriction (ugh!) 
    and so this probably isn't high on the list of priorities.
    But it would certainly be nice to have and I wanted to mention it
    for completeness.
    
    Thanks,
    
    --Andrew
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name		DateLines
344.1AISG::WARNERIt's only work if they make you do itFri Jun 01 1990 14:3910
If you're willing to use "Cats" and "Dogs" as the actual section titles, you
can do this by using:

	<REFERENCE>(cat_section\TEXT)

     and

	<REFERENCE>(dog_section\TEXT)

Still, your idea would be a lot more flexible!
344.2on the wishlistOLD::UTTFri Jun 01 1990 15:116
    Yes, I like the <hotspot> idea, and will (what else?) put it on the
    wishlist for DOCUMENT postV2.0.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Mary
344.3ThanksCRAYON::GENTThere is no poetry without madness -- DemocritusFri Jun 01 1990 15:4212
    Re: .1
    
    Hi Ross,
    
    Yes, I realize I can write around it. But, section titles 
    require initial caps (for example, "How to Declare Precedures and 
    Variables"). So they would still have to be handled as section titles,
    not as generic text in the sentence.
    
    Re: .2
    
    Thanks Mary!
344.4Remember subheadsCOOKIE::RJOHNSTONFri Jun 01 1990 17:417
RE: .1

I concur with Andrew in .3 and point out that subheads don't take
symbols.  I'd find <HOTSPOT> extremely useful for subheads.

Rose
344.5An associated wish: capturing symbol namesCRAYON::GENTThere is no poetry without madness -- DemocritusThu Jun 21 1990 02:0428
    Hi Rose,
    
    I think you misunderstood. The <HOTSPOT> tag I am suggesting
    doesn't assign a symbol, it just creates a cross-reference to
    an existing symbol.
    
    But while I'm making requests... (ha!) I would also add the 
    following associated wishlist item:
    
    Please add a mechanism for cross-referencing "chunks" that do not have
    user-defined symbol names (such as subheads, as Rose suggests,
    and commands, routines, and statements in reference sections).
    One method I might suggest is to allow the user to assign a synonym
    for the current chunk's symbol. Something like:
    
    	<SUBHEAD1>(More on the subject)
    	<ONLINE_XREFERENCE>(MORE_STUFF)
    		.
    		.
    		.
    	For more on this subject, see <HOTSPOT>(MORE_STUFF\the preceding
    	section).
    
    An alternative is to allow the user to assign symbol names on the 
    <ONLINE_CHUNK> tag. (However, this might result in hack-y coding,
    such as <SUBHEAD1>(More on the subject) <ONLINE_CHUNK>(MORE_STUFF).)
    
    --Andrew
344.6OLD::UTTanyone with any sense had already left town...Thu Jun 21 1990 10:1317
    Andrew,
    
    It's already on the wishlist to add symbol-defining capabilities to
    <subhead>, <command>, <routine>, etc. (I'd like to see <list> added to
    the list, too.) And I think it would be easier coding (and more
    consistent with DOCUMENT in general) to say:
    
    <subhead1>(More on the subject\more)
    
    The <online_chunk> tag, BTW, is a hack whose purpose in life is
    to break up large chunks of stuff (informal code examples, very
    long lists, and so on) that aren't otherwise broken up by headers,
    etc. and that TeX can't swallow and runs out of memory on (sort
    of like this sentence...). So it doesn't really apply for what you
    suggest.
    
    Mary