> > The above would output something similar to:
> > 
> >  CHANGELOG
> > 
> >  -------------------------------------------------------
> >  |Version  | Role | Description                         |
> >  -------------------------------------------------------
> >  |4.3.0    | .... |foo() is binary safe.                |
> >  -------------------------------------------------------
> >  |4.2.0    | .... |The length parameter is optional     |
> >  |         | .... |with a default value of 1024         |
> >  -------------------------------------------------------
> >  |4.1.0    | .... |length                               |
> >  -------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > Also, the changelog would go below the return value refsect.  If
> > the above format won't work please provide a specific style so
> > we can implement ASAP!  Through time we may add additional roles.
> 
> If you expect a table layout, why overload simple paragraphs with 
> attributes? If it is going to be a table, then para is not right for the 
> markup IMHO. It does not fit semantically and does not fit into DocBook 
> either. BTW I have not checked, but I don't think docbook has a version 
> attribute which applies to para :) What would be the problem with using 
> table markup for changelogs?

The idea was to allow other formatting by livedocs but if we want to go
table then let's just do that and do so with a list of role entities
inside of language-defs.ent (similar to the reftitle entities).

I copied the version tag from your example! :)

A table feels better for the changelog, still not sure about the parameter 
listing.  The manual may look nice with the parameter list using a varlist 
while the changelog uses a table.  Both using table would be a lot of 
tables!

I'll work on some examples, this is going to be good.

Regards,
Philip

Reply via email to