Hi Regina, В письме от 26 октября 2015 10:19:18 пользователь Regina Henschel написал: > some contributors are not happy with ALv2 automatically included in the > license for new help files, and it would by nice having a pure Mozilla > license for new files. If we provide that, it will become necessary to > keep the license, when the file is edited later on. > > Currently the license is an xml-comment (<!-- license -->). That has the > shortcoming that any xsl-transformation will loose it. Especially the > helpauthoring tools looses any license information, when opening an .xhp > file, and writes a default license including ALv2 when saving the file. > > To keep the license, I suggest to introduce a new element "license" in > the doctype. Having such element, the helpauthoring tool can write the > Mozilla license into the element "license" for new files. If the tool > detects an element "license" when opening a file, it can keep it. If the > tool does not detect such element, then it can generate an element > "license" and write the current mixed license as its content. > > Does a tool exists, that automatically checks, that all files have got a > license? Then it might be, that it would have to be adapted. > > If such element should become required, a script is needed to move the > license text from kind xml-comment to element content. Would that > produce a request for translation? > > What do you think about it?
Can not we just do not touch the comments? Or do we need to be sure to lock them in the <comment></comment> tag? Best regards, Lera -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
