Closed varkappadev closed 1 year ago
Here's the complete docbook:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?asciidoc-toc?>
<?asciidoc-numbered?>
<article xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" xmlns:xl="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" version="5.0" xml:lang="en">
<info>
<title>My Title</title>
<date>2023-05-01</date>
<author>
<personname>
<firstname>Me</firstname>
</personname>
</author>
<authorinitials>M</authorinitials>
</info>
<abstract>
<simpara>Brief summary…​</simpara>
</abstract>
</article>
Is the docbook produced by asciidoctor correct? See https://tdg.docbook.org/tdg/5.1/abstract.html
These elements contain abstract: biblioentry, bibliomixed, bibliomset, biblioset, info (db.info), info (db.titleforbidden.info), info (db.titleonly.info), info (db.titleonlyreq.info), info (db.titlereq.info), merge.
It looks like it isn't valid to put an abstract element directly under article
; it should instead go under info
, and that is where pandoc expects it. If you move it there, the problem goes away.
So far as I can see, then, this is a bug in asciidoctor.
You are right @jgm, this is a bug in asciidoctor (anyone else who runs into this, see https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor/issues/3602). I didn't notice this is not supported in docbook5.
Thanks!
affected version: 3.1.2
M(N)WE:
Starting with the following document
and converting to docbook using
results in a document with the following snippet (non-relevant parts removed)
Converting this to pdf
or to latex for debugging:
results in a document with the abstract included twice, such as (for the latex output)
I would have expected only the
\begin{abstract}...\end{abstract}
part.pandoc 2.17.1.1 on Debian does not include the
abstract
environment but does include thequote
one. I am aware this is a large version difference and does not narrow it down that much but may be helpful nonetheless.This may be related to work addressing metadata processing such as #7747.