[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Erroneous page numbering in .PDF output



Hello All.

This is a problem that has vexed me for a while, at least since I
started trying to create a .pdf from SGML source.  Whenever I use
db2pdf, it seems that everything goes well, but the finished .pdf has a
couple of interesting properties.  First, in the table of contents, all
the sections are hyper-linked to their proper position in the document.  
This is cool as far as it goes, but is there a method to disable the
feature?

Second, and more problematic, is the way the pages are numbered.  My
preference is to have the Contents and Preface sections use lowercase
Roman numerals (i, ii, etc.) and have the actual numbering start at page
1 of Chapter 1.  However, what I'm getting is the first page of the
contents getting numbered as 1 on through the Preface and into the
chapters.  While I realize Docbook isn't WYSIWIG, I would like to ensure
the front matter is numbered seperate from the main text.

I'm sure this can be done as I have an SGML source document from
http://www.wsmake.org and although the .pdf available on the site is
correctly numbered and doesn't have the hyperlinks, when I build a local
.pdf from the same source, mine is as described above.  In fact the 
author is using Debian Sid and recommends simply installing task-sgml to 
get all the tools.  I did the same in Potato.  Although a few of the 
packages are a bit newer, the Docbook DTD used by the document is 
version 3.1.

I'm at a loss.  If there is a FM, I'd appreciate being pointed to it
(yes I have the book, Docbook the Definitive Guide installed).

Thanks!

- Nate >>

-- 
 Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB          | "None can love freedom
 Internet | n0nb@networksplus.net               | heartily, but good
 Location | Bremen, Kansas USA EM19ov           | men; the rest love not
   Wichita area exams; ham radio; Linux info @  | freedom, but license."
             http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/           | -- John Milton



Reply to: