Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: clarify profiling logic

[ed nixon <ed.nixon@lynnparkplace.org>]

Yes, that's a good idea, too.

Because I'm using sdocbook, I now find that my choice of profiling 
attributes is considerably smaller than would be the case with full db. 
It's too bad, for example, that 'status' hasn't been included in the 
profiling code; it would be useful for section level profiling.

I've done a small hack of profile-mode.xsl (and profile.xsl too) to 
include my own attributes; it will become a customization now that I 
understand the code a bit better. I might extend it to include the ID 
attribute. (I know there is code for using ID to generate html, but at 
the moment I'm chopping up xml to output xml.)

My so called "general" approach will have to wait until I have better 
xslt chops, I'm afraid.

cheers.            ...edN

Peter Kullmann wrote:
> You could also use a two-phase approach (it's what we are using). 
> First profile with e.g. audiencelevel and then profile the result
> with contentlevel. 
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: ed nixon [mailto:ed.nixon@lynnparkplace.org]
>>Sent: Mittwoch, 19. Februar 2003 19:21
>>To: Jirka Kosek
>>Cc: docbookapp
>>Subject: Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: clarify profiling logic
>>
>>
>>Jirka Kosek wrote:
>>
>>>ed nixon wrote:
>>><snip/>
>>>If you really think that you need more then one custom profiling
>>>attribute, then submit RFE. It would be easy to add parameters like
>>>profile.attribute1 and profile.value1.
>>
>>Thanks, Jirka. I can live with what there is now. Besides, I get a 
>>little twitchy when I see things like something1 and then something2 and 
>>then...
>>
>>I'm trying to think how a more general solution would look to the user. 
>>For example,
>><xsl:param name="profile.attribute" 
>>attname="audiencelevel">manager</xsl:param> or
>><xsl:param name="profile.attribute" attname="os">unix</xsl:param> etc.
>>
>>But that's without thinking at all about what has to go on under the 
>>hood or whether it's a good idea in terms of consistency of style with 
>>the rest of the suite.
>>
>>Thanks again.                   ...edN
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>