Doh! I had re-written the article template to:

   <xsl:template match="d:article">

<!--use page sequence for title page (template removed for email)-->

     <xsl:call-template name="make.article.tocs"/>


     <xsl:call-template name="page.sequence">
       <xsl:with-param name="master-reference">body</xsl:with-param>
       <xsl:with-param name="content">
         <xsl:apply-templates
             select="*[not(self::bibliography)]"/>
       </xsl:with-param>
     </xsl:call-template>

    <!--bibliography template goes here-->
   </xsl:template>

Changing the apply-templates instruction to:

<xsl:apply-templates
             select="*[not(self::bibliography)]|processing-instruction()"/>

Fixes the problem.

Thanks

Paul

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Bob Stayton <[email protected]> wrote:

> **
> Hi Paul,
> Actually, the stylesheets do process anything under root for an article.
> The template with match="article" in fo/component.xsl ends with:
>
> <xsl:apply-templates/>
>
> which means it applies templates to all children of the article element.
> The "book" template in divison.xsl does the same.
>
> When I put a hard pagebreak PI in an article after all sections and before
> a glossary, it works.  I'm not sure why it does not work for you.
>
> Bob Stayton
> Sagehill Enterprises
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Paul Tremblay <[email protected]>
> *To:* DocBook Apps <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:47 AM
> *Subject:* [docbook-apps] where to include hard-pagebreak instruction?
>
> Per Bob's book, I use the processing instruction <?hard-pagebreak?> in my
> documents to force page breaks, for example, before and after the glossary
> in my docbook with the root element as "article". However, including just
> <?hard-pagebreak?> by itself, (along with the correct FO code, of course),
> has no affect, because the stylesheets don't process processing
> instructions just under the root. If I do:
>
> <para>
>  <?hard-pagebreak?>
> </para>
>
> Then I get what I want, but then technically the resulting docbook is not
> valid.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Paul
>
>

Reply via email to