openSUSE / suse-xsl

DocBook XSL Stylesheets for SUSE branding
Other
11 stars 10 forks source link

[Adoc] Grouping of callouts #500

Open r0ckarong opened 5 years ago

r0ckarong commented 5 years ago

Problem description

When using callouts you can re-use the same callout number for various lines across the example. For some reason, DAPS renumbers the callouts for each repetition and then groups the renumbering together. This causes a seemingly broken callout list (formatting) and confuses readers.

https://github.com/SUSE/doc-caasp/issues/479

the original file is this: https://github.com/SUSE/doc-caasp/blob/master/adoc/deployment-loadbalancer.adoc

Is this some remnant of the docbook stylesheet? Some reason the callouts can't be the same in multiple lines? If so can we somehow change the formatting output of the callout bubbles? Maybe 1/2/3 or make it more clear that those are groups and not just some random line skips?

Expected behavior

Either implement the same behavior as in asciidoctor and use 3 callouts for the 8 lines that are tagged.

Alternatively: Change formatting to make it more clear these are deliberate groups of the same callout but with separate numbers.

Steps to reproduce the behavior

fsundermeyer commented 5 years ago

Sorry, but there is little I can do - asciidoctor is doing this while converting to DocBook - it numbers the callouts subsequently, ignoring the original input:

upstream k8s-masters {
    #hash $remote_addr consistent; <co xml:id="CO2-1"/>
    server master00:6443 weight=1 max_fails=1; <co xml:id="CO2-2"/>
    ...
upstream dex-backends {
    #hash $remote_addr consistent; <co xml:id="CO2-3"/>
    server master00:32000 weight=1 max_fails=1; <co xml:id="CO2-4"/>

I think you need to file this bug upstream (asciidoctor).

@sknorr However, there is a bug in our stylesheets. the following code:

<callout arearefs="CO2-1 CO2-3 CO2-6">
 <para>foo bar ipsum</para>
</callout>

is HTML rendered as

1
3
6 foo bar ipsum

If it would be

1 3 6 foo bar ipsum

it would be less painful

r0ckarong commented 5 years ago

Yes the second layout would be a simple fix for this.