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

Add pagebreaks to Pandoc #3230

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hubertp-lshift
Copy link
Contributor

@hubertp-lshift hubertp-lshift commented Nov 14, 2016

A first stab at adding pagebreaks to Pandoc. Fully implemented for ODT (reader & writer).
Also added a few other writers, when the underlying format supported them out of the box.

Depends on jgm/pandoc-types#28

hubertp-lshift pushed a commit to lshift-de/typesetr2 that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2016
Added to check that our change in Pandoc that
adds page breaks (PR jgm/pandoc#3230)
leads to correctly formatted .tex documents.
@wilx
Copy link
Contributor

wilx commented Nov 16, 2016

I wonder this could be implemented using the FORM FEED character for textual output formats.

This requires an updated version of pandoc-types that
introduces PageBreak definition.
Not that this initial commit only introduces ODT pagebreaks
and distinguishes for it page breaks before, after, or both,
the paragraph, as read from the style definition.
Update all writers to take into account page breaks.
A straightforwad, far from complete, implementation of page
breaks in selected writers.
Readers will have to follow in the future as well.
@hubertp-lshift
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wilx for the purpose of latex/odt, maybe. I didn't try it. But I think pagebreaks is such a common (and desired) feature that it deserves its own definition for the purpose of other readers/writers.

@jgm
Copy link
Owner

jgm commented Jan 16, 2017

@hubertp-lshift I've merged this into the typeclass branch (which will become pandoc 2.0).

However, I'm not sure it's right for PageBreak to be an Inline element. It seems more appropriate as a Block. Can you comment on why you chose to make it an Inline? (This may be more natural in ODT, but we should also consider other output formats.)

@jgm
Copy link
Owner

jgm commented Jan 22, 2017

I've reverted this. It needs more thought and discussion.

@mb21
Copy link
Collaborator

mb21 commented Jan 22, 2017

The place for discussion is probably #1934

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants