Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Insert special markers around words to avoid linking #417

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 13, 2024

Conversation

hakonhagland
Copy link
Collaborator

Currently only COMPS in section 5.3 is marked. See: #411 (comment). I plan to update this PR when more cases are spotted.

@blattms
Copy link
Member

blattms commented Nov 11, 2024

I think @gdfldm should comment on this. It might be that he only had COMPS in the table in mind, where the meaning was different for sure.

I am not 100% sure whether I understand and agree with all the changes. Especially, CPR is keyword and the links would be nice at most places. For API it is a bit different, but IMHO, if it says "API tracking" it would be nice to have a link.

Anyway, a few false links might not even hurt too much... Just my 2 cents.

@gdfldm
Copy link
Collaborator

gdfldm commented Nov 11, 2024

I agree generally it would be good to have a link anyway. For example, when referring to the PERMX array a link to the PERMX keyword could be helpful.
In the specific cases here of API and CPR these all appear on the keyword page so I don't think the link adds anything, for example:
image
Where "API tracking" appears elsewhere in the manual I think it is worth having a link.

@blattms
Copy link
Member

blattms commented Nov 13, 2024

@hakonhagland What do you think? Will you add changes?

Maybe we should not do to much special-casing in the scripts to keep them simple. may a link to the current subsection or one that points to a page that is a bit unrelated does not hurt that much to warrant extra work. Our readers are smart people and probably won't click on those.

@hakonhagland
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Will you add changes?

@blattms I think we can proceed with the changes in this PR. These changes are in the .fodt files themselves, so it does not complicate the script to have them or not to have them. I think as you said: It does not matter much if we have these changes (avoid linking in the special cases listed here) or not. But as @gdfldm has read through Chapter 5 more carefully in his review, I trust that these changes (not linking for the special cases listed here) will improve the reader experience.

@blattms blattms merged commit 94d9fb6 into OPM:main Nov 13, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants