Didier Spaier <didier@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> Mmm, I'm unsure how the result is readable with the speakup screen >> reader itself. I have attached the result, could people on the speakup >> mailing list check how well it goes? If it significantly degrades >> readability, we'll have to reject the move to rst formatting, since in >> the end it's people who use the speakup screen reader who need to be >> able to read this document. >> Samuel > > Can we not have two versions? I don't have Sphinx installed (used to format > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/index.html) but converted > speakup.rst to > html5 using rst2html5.py and indeed the output is way better looking > and easier > to navigate than the txt version. RST is ok with Speakup et al, both in source form and when converted to HTML and rendered in a console browser. > Is it still true? PS I widely prefer the asciidoc/asciidoctor format > than rst, > but the choice has been done for the Linux Kernel documentation, I know... I knew you were a man of impeccably good taste, Didier, and this confirms it. From a technical standpoint, asciidoc is meant as a readable plain-text representation of docbook, so it is easily convertable to the formats supported by docbook. But the kernel has settled on RST. Speakup docs should use whatever the rest of the kernel docs are using, and I see no compelling reason why they cannot. -- Chris Brannon Founder: Blind and Low Vision Unix Users Group (https://blvuug.org/). Personal website: (https://the-brannons.com/) Chat: IRC: teiresias on libera.chat and OFTC, XMPP: chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
