Joerg Mayer wrote:
With your solution you have to *know* that you must copy the graphics
directory too. And even worse, you cannot put the graphics into the html
dir, as this would result in broken graphics links.
Well, if you feel about it thaaaaaat strongly, I can change it back :-)
I just want you to consider the following: You have to know what to
copy in the first place. It just changed from 1 directory to 2 directories
(in the chunked html case) and 1 directory + 1 file in the big html case.
I fact, if you want to provide both html texts on a web page, you don't
have to replicate all the images.
You could simply move the huge html page into the dir of the chunks to
achieve this.
So my question is: is it really that bad?
Well, think about the deployment. For example, we provide zip files of
the chunked_html which will unzip into a single folder with all the html
files and a subfolder of the graphics, just the way I would expect it
. I wouldn't expect two dirs at the same dir level coming out of the zip
file.
Would an install target that created a tar.gz or zip file help to get
around your concerns? If not, see my first words in ths paragraph, let
me know and I'll change it back.
Yes please.
BTW: Your solution broke the image links already, all screenshots in the
html_chunked dir seem to be broken.
Ok, the chm file will include the graphics so the situation is a
bit.different here.
I take it that I won't have to change this one back no matter how you
decide on the html case?
Hmmm, I'm not sure if it's a good idea to to it differently for almost
the same thing (html, html_chunked and chm), as the chm generation is
done quite the same way as the html generation (doing same things the
same way is usually a good idea to keep things simple).
Please let me know whether it works and what you think of the other
changes.
I won't try that patch for the reasons described above.
I'd still be happy to know whether the change works on a technical
level. If I were to commit just the change you answered with ok now,
I wouldn't know whether I'd break things on the Windows side.
I've just tried your patch and it worked as expected, except for the
things described above.
Regards, ULFL
