On 7/19/07, M.Canales.es <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > El Jueves, 19 de Julio de 2007 20:00, Dan Nicholson escribió: > > > > > The problem is that the entities aren't resolved within the PIs, so it > > just comes out as &glibc-version;. > > > > Oh, yes, that's a PITA. > > > Another option I thought of was to use a custom DTD for <sect1> by > > just overloading the standard DocBook one with a local one. But I'd > > prefer not to do that since it adds potential for errors in the local > > sect1 definition. > > When the sources will be migrated to Relax-NG such type of schema > customizations will be very more easy to do. > > For now, looks that the <sect1info> way is the most semantically proper one. > The issue is that when using DocBook-5 all <*info> tags must be replaced by > plain <info>.
Ahh, I hadn't even considered DocBook5 yet. Good stuff to know. > Plus, we should to use <sect1info condition="script"> to be sure that it's not > rendered on the HTML or PDF outputs. OK. Then just test for @condition = 'script', right? I'll start playing around on lfs.xsl in jhalfs since those stylesheets are more used than dump-commands. My goal is to resurrect the paco functionality, but to do it in a clean way. I.e., no patches. In my mind, the only way to do this is at the xsl level. In the process, I hope to make jhalfs a little more pluggable. We'll see how that goes. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discuss FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
