> oh well, you can't expect me to fully understand this wonderfully
> documented code, can you? :-) good then that was so simple to adjust
Of course not, I am impressed that you understand it at all. All .4ht
files are generated from literate sources available here:
For example tex4ht.sty is generated from tex4ht-sty.tex. The problem
is that the literate sources don't contain much more info and the
literate programming environment that is used, ProTeXt, is a bit
esoteric. So in most cases, I just fix issues in the .4ht files and
then I import them back to the literate sources.
> well with the above minimal surgery being successful there is no rush I
> guess. But, of course, if you can look at it earlier the better since
> that would allow us jointly to see if something seems to be missing or
> incorrectly implemented. This is the main reason we we tried to give al
> of us 2-3 month prior to the official release to weed out anything still
> wrong or questionable.
I hope to take a look at this in August. I will have holidays, so I
should be able to find time for that.
> welcome, and thanks for testing, while we try to anticipate as much as
> possible it is difficult to catch everything beforehand. tex4ht went
> through the cracks because it doesn't use normal TeX file extension so
> my checks across TeXLive code simply overlooked it ... certainly
> something I learned here
I should add some testing for latex-dev and package updates to TeX4ht
sources as well, because now we catch regressions only from user