Subject: Re: bug#58196: Trivial update to ediprolog

From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:51:32 -0700

Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]> writes:

>> For example, we could put factorial.png in
>> /images/<package-name>/factorial.png.  The only cost is a bit of
>
> But the page which links to it is not inside `/images/<package-name>/`
> so the relative link will still fail.

I was thinking of using absolute but domain-specific links, i.e. moving
all images to the directory:

    $WEBROOT/images/<package>

And then changing the img-tags to read:

    <img src="/images/<package>/<image>">

That way, we don't need to worry about relative links.  So, for example,
if we have an image named "screenshot.png" in the repository for
<package>, and it looks something like this in the raw HTML export:

    <img src="https://cdn.github.com/foo/bar/screenshot.png">

We replace everything before the last "/" with "/images/<package>", or
indeed just add it there if the link is relative, so we end up with:

    <img src="/images/<package>/screenshot.png">

Does that make sense?

> I think we need to first move the packages's webpages from
>
>    https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/<PKG>.html
>
> to
>
>    https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/<PKG>/index.html
>
> and then we can more easily copy image files and anything else to
> that subdirectory.

That's another option, yes.  That would allow us to use relative links.

Do we anticipate more things going in that directory, too?  Perhaps some
packages will ship with some non-documentation resource files that don't
belong in $WEBROOT/doc?  If so, this option might be cleaner in the long
run.