> I'm against it too. Most of docs already use <literal> and
> I think Goba's right with TRUE not being a constant anymore.
Well, it is listed as a constant is the source, but I
can only say, I don't think of it as a constant.
> I would like to point out that spotting all True/FALse occurrences
> and turning them into tagged version would bring consistancy to
> docs, which is far beyond turning all literal -> constant.
Well, anyway it is a good thing (TM) to bring consistancy to
the docs, and please do not forget about changing this.
Isn't there any other useful docbook tag for TRUE and FALSE?
Goba
