Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: \ref in docs

\ref in docs

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
In the developers documentation, I am seeing \ref like:
 Figure \ref{parsetree} shows the parse tree built by the grammar rules
 Note that every Sort and SeqScan node appearing in figure \ref{plan} has

I can't figure out what they should be.  The developers manual from
Stephan's stuff is really good.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026

Re: \ref in docs

From
Thomas Lockhart
Date:
> In the developers documentation, I am seeing \ref like:
>   Figure \ref{parsetree} shows the parse tree built by the grammar rules
>   Note that every Sort and SeqScan node appearing in figure \ref{plan} has
> I can't figure out what they should be.  The developers manual from
> Stephan's stuff is really good.

Yes it is. I apparently forgot to resolve the rest of these latex-isms
into docbook-isms for referring to tables or graphics. In most cases
they were referring to internal tabular or listing info, so are
trivial to resolve; I had originally thought that they were referring
to graphics which I wasn't finding elsewhere.

There are probably a few other problems lurking in there; the markup
transformation was a pretty big job...
                - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California

Re: [DOCS] Re: \ref in docs

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
> > In the developers documentation, I am seeing \ref like:
> >   Figure \ref{parsetree} shows the parse tree built by the grammar rules
> >   Note that every Sort and SeqScan node appearing in figure \ref{plan} has
> > I can't figure out what they should be.  The developers manual from
> > Stephan's stuff is really good.
> 
> Yes it is. I apparently forgot to resolve the rest of these latex-isms
> into docbook-isms for referring to tables or graphics. In most cases
> they were referring to internal tabular or listing info, so are
> trivial to resolve; I had originally thought that they were referring
> to graphics which I wasn't finding elsewhere.
> 
> There are probably a few other problems lurking in there; the markup
> transformation was a pretty big job...

Yes, I can imagine.  It looks pretty good.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026