I do not have a strong opinion about which version to use, mostly out of ignorance, but somewhat based on practicality. We are using a very small subset (at the moment) of the total number of DocBook tags, so I am not 100% about whether we need to be on the bleeding edge. My recommendation of using version 4.x is based on what is available with the WYSIWYG editor, Serna Free, which support version 4.2 out of the box. There could be compelling reasons to use a later version of the schema, but they are not apparent to me. Based on our immediate requirements to have a somewhat more streamlined set of documents, the editors that are practical for both geeks and those less inclined to use VI for editing DocBook, it would make sense to stick with something that is perhaps not bleeding edge, but practical. I think the changes Jo has made to the pom are great and significantly ease the building on the documentation on my side (working over an incredibly bad link).
Unless there are other reasons, I think we should tread softly, and stick with what works for now. On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Lars Helge Øverland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Jo Størset <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Den 18. nov. 2009 kl. 15.08 skrev Lars Helge Øverland: >> >> 5.0 is available: >> >> http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.docbook/docbook-xml >> >> Notice the size of the binary.. 0 bytes > > > Doh.. > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
