On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Alberto Mijares wrote:
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 3:56 AM, Gabor Kovesdan <[email protected]> wrote:
Em 24-05-2013 19:35, Gabor Kovesdan escreveu:
I'm working on upgrading our documentation set to DocBook 5.0 and I'd like
to discuss some details. We have some customizations and strange uses, which
can be expressed with DocBook 5.0's own vocabulary. This upgrade is a good
opportunity to change these, as well. I propose the following changes in our
vocabulary:
One more thing to discuss: shall we maintain the sect1, sect2, ... elements
or just use section? The section element can have another section element
embedded and the numbering in the rendered version is inferred by the level
of embedment. This is more uniform and less redundant. In own docs that I
write with DocBook I only use section and it works fine. Opinions?
IMHO, is a good thing to keep a visual clue of the level you are going
down while writing.
Yes, but that is what the indentation also does.
So, <sect[123...]> should be kept, I think.
But it is another thing the user has to track.
The DocBook 5 book shows both forms. Converting to <section> would be
just a search and replace. Do we need to pick one method before the
DockBook 5 version merge?
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
