search

asciidoctor / asciidoctor-fopub

A portable DocBook-to-PDF build command that wraps DocBook XSL and Apache FOP
MIT License
113 stars 37 forks source link

align rendition with the asciidoctor html5 backend #62

Closed getreu closed 3 years ago

getreu commented 8 years ago

Changes:

  1. Increase ident for numbered lists with more than 9 items (ex. bibliograpy)
  2. Serif font for body, sans for titles
  3. Figure (and other) captions are now italic, not bold, same size
mojavelinux commented 8 years ago

@rahmanusta How do you feel about the style changes?

I'm not sure changing the block titles to italic universally is the right way to go (but I'm not sure I'm against it either). While it does align with the default styles for the HTML output and Asciidoctor PDF, we haven't necessarily stated it's a goal for all the output formats to have the same style.

mojavelinux commented 8 years ago

In other words, not everyone is going to want the same theme. What we are shooting for is a reasonable default. I expect anyone would is branding their output to use their own theme (which means providing an override XSL file).

getreu commented 8 years ago

Of course, this is why we provide alternative themes in common.xsl. But the asciidoctor theme should be coherent in all back ends. Don't you think so?

mojavelinux commented 8 years ago

Of course, this is why we provide alternative themes in common.xsl. But the asciidoctor theme should be coherent in all back ends. Don't you think so?

As I mentioned on the mailinglist, I don't necessarily agree. I think it should look right for the medium. I am in support of not using proprietary fonts. However, if we make that switch, then we should provide the fonts that we are using so that the output is reproducible independent of the platform / OS.

I don't really think there is an "Asciidoctor" theme yet. All the converters we have style the output differently. The default stylesheet for HTML is very specific to the medium of the browser. We could certainly look into aligning on a color palette and fonts, but there are going to be natural differences do to the nature of the format (where background colors are needed for the web, they may not be good for print / PDF or render correctly in an EPUB3 reader). I think the focus should be on being presentable / readable more than being identical.

getreu commented 8 years ago

I am in support of not using proprietary fonts.

Georgia and Arial are proprietary non free fonts with many restrictions (e.g. distribution). This is more about first choice defaults that should point to free fonts that are commonly installed anyway. If they are not then I agree, fall back to a proprietary font like Arial or Georgia is ok.

getreu commented 8 years ago

Anyway, please find attached a new pull request with the all the changes you asked.

mojavelinux commented 8 years ago

Georgia and Arial are proprietary non free fonts with many restrictions (e.g. distribution).

Yes, I know. And I'm not in support of using them. But they are the most common fonts, so up to now we've been able to assume they are present on the system. If we switch to open fonts, we must bundle them because there's no open font that's universally installed.

mojavelinux commented 8 years ago

If they are not then I agree, fall back to a proprietary font like Arial or Georgia is ok.

It might clearer if I restate. If we rely on system fonts, it must be the MS core fonts because those are the only fonts that are on just about every system (though that's becoming less true in Linux these days because of web fonts). But I don't want to rely on system fonts or proprietary fonts, so we have to bundle the fonts we use.

mojavelinux commented 8 years ago

@getreu At this point, I'm willing to make you a committer on this project so you can proceed with this work. As I've mentioned, this project is not my focus and I don't want to stand in the way of progress. If you feel like you can advance it, and get others involved, then I want to empower you to do that. Are you interested?

getreu commented 8 years ago

@mojavelinux Thank you for your trust. Yes I am interested! I would like to reflect overnight and confirm tomorrow.

mojavelinux commented 6 years ago

@getreu If you are still interesting in maintaining this project, or helping to maintain it, I've opened a dedicated issue to discuss. See #89.

getreu commented 6 years ago

@mojavelinux thank you for suggesting. I am still using asciidoctor-fopub. Unfortunately I do not have time for a new project at the moment. Maybe @bsmith-n4 is interested? Commits · NumberFour/asciidoctor-fopub

mojavelinux commented 6 years ago

There are quite a lot of changes in this PR. I recommend breaking this up into smaller chunks so it's easier to trace back if something breaks. I also find that creating smaller PR always helps me find ways to improve the code, so it's a nice self-review process.

getreu commented 6 years ago

Yes, I agree. May intension was to check out if it still works.