How about "This is only for the unusual case where you want to maintain the TOC by hand, AND need the elements pre-numbered for some reason."
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerrit Kuilder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Norman Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Bob Stayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "docbook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 12:55 AM Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: Simplfying the ToC content model > HEllo All, > > Norman Walsh wrote: > > > / Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > > | That puts the burden on the user to verify manually that the nesting is > > | correct. Wasn't that what DTD's were supposed to provide? ISTM that > > > > This is only for the unusual case where you want to maintain the TOC > > by hand. > > > > Be seeing you, > > norm > > > Peter makea a good point, and I am not quite sure how unusual it is to > maintain or recreate the toc 'by hand' (or script/xsl). With the nested > toc and with the proper class there is always this nagging feeling that > the toc could be incorrect. > > > And how unuasual is the 'manual' maintance of the toc? There must be > quite few companies/people using the docbook outside the docbook/dssl/fo > setup who need to generate the toc one way or another. > > Regards, > > Gerrit > > >
