On Fri, Apr 21, 2000 at 03:08:38PM -0400, Paul Lussier wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I don't know if anyone has run into this one yet, nor if it's been fixed.
You will see that this isn't a bug but a terminology confusion. I don't blame
you BTW. (on the other hand I should since today is friday! But since this is is holy
friday...) ;)
> Here's the scenario:
>
> Using linuxdoc template
> Have Section header
> Followed by Pararagraph header
> Followed by Standard
>
> sgmlcheck complains:
>
> /usr/bin/nsgmls:<OSFD>0:436:6:E: document type does not allow element "SECT3" here
> /usr/bin/nsgmls:<OSFD>0:529:4:E: character data is not allowed here
>
> ad nauseum...
>
> Looking at either File->View Postscript
>
> *OR*
>
> File->Export->as Linuxdoc
>
> then run:
> sgml2latex file
> dvips file.dvi -o file.ps
> gv file.ps
>
> Then this particular Section Header is missing from the TOC and the document
> itself!
>
> If I change the doc to:
>
> Have Section header
> Followed by Pararagraph header
> Followed by carriage return
> Followed by Standard
>
> Then look at the ps version the way it's supposed to.
> So, to summarize, it appears that a Section Header *MUST* be followed by
> something other than a Paragragh Header.
You should remember the document hierarchy
Name linuxdoc
1 Section -> <sect>
2 Subsection -> <sect1>
3 Subsubsection -> <sect2>
4 Paragraph -> <sect3>
5 Subparagraph -> <sect4>
On the other side the <p> element (a normal paragraph) is represented by the
Standard layout. So here standard means paragraph since that is the most usual
layout used.
When you insert a Paragraph after a Section you are violating the linuxdoc dtd,
A Section can be followed by a Subsection or a standard paragraph. The Subsection
could be followed by a a Standard paragraph or a Subsubsection...
Is this clear. The terminology here is the responsible for this confusion, as this
is the normal latex convention the layout names where maintained for compatibility.
Is this clear?
> Is this accurate? Is this correct behaviour and I'm not aware of some rule or
> other, or is this really a bug?
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Seeya,
> Paul
> ----
> "I always explain our company via interpretive dance.
> I meet lots of interesting people that way."
> Niall Kavanagh, 10 April, 2000
>
> If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!
>
--
Jos�
