If my previous patch applied OK, here are two more. > -----Original Message----- > From: Joshua Slive [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 10:46 PM > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, Vincent de Lau wrote: > > > DTD's > > ----- > > section/related elements > > The section element relies on related, which is not in common.dtd. > > Also, in the current definition, you can have multiple > related elements > > within one section. > > I propose to move the related and directivelist element to > common.dtd and > > change the section element to: > > Sounds good. > > > <!ELEMENT section (title, related?, (section | %blocktags;)*)> > > This would have the following results on module docs: > > - enforces title element, which was optional but could occur multiple > > times > > I'm not sure whether or not we want to allow sections without titles. I > guess we can ban them for now and see how it goes. > > > - allows related element to be used > > I've discovered one page that will not conform after the changes: mod_rewrite > > uses a section element to group an image with a caption and does not use a title element. > > That can be fixed. >
see dtd_fix.patch > > > > XSLT > > ---- > > general > > common.dtd calls a template for a meta element, which does > not exist in > > any DTD or current XML file. Should it be removed? > > Yes. > > > > > manualpage > > The title in the generated page is prepended with 'Apache Module'. > > Should we change this in 'Apache Manual:' or discard it? > > Changing it would require an update to all the message files. > > Discard. My mistake, certainly. > see xslt_fix.patch Vincent de Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dtd_fix.patch
Description: Binary data
xslt_fix.patch
Description: Binary data
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
