Re: [docbook4] dbpoolx.mod incorrectness / same FPI for soextblx.dtd for all DB4 releases

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

/ Daniel Leidert <daniel.leidert.spam@gmx.net> was heard to say:
| Could someone please comment on
| http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=209147 (here on the
| list is enough)? I'm currently updating this package and I'm wondering,
| if the documentation is wrong or if docinfo.char.mix and word.char.mix
| contain the wrong elements.

My guess is that the PE definitions have drifted over time and the
documentation has become out of date. If I had to guess, I'd say that
we were persuaded to put acronym in some content model that included
docinfo.char.mix but not word.char.mix and we couldn't put it in both
because that would have resulted in an illegal content model.

| Another question: All DB4 releases contain a catalog entry for the same
| FPI "-//OASIS//DTD XML Exchange Table Model 19990315//EN". Now I'm
| wondering, if soextblx.dtd is backwards compatible?

I think so.

| Last question: In a bug-report I read that the DB TC asked for not
| packaging CRs. But I'm wondering, if you would maybe be interested in
| DB5 packages distributed with Debian to get feedback/bug-report (I know,
| the door for feature requests ends soon)?

Uhm. I guess that would be ok with me.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | The sense of existence is the
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | greatest happiness.--Benjamin
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | Disraeli

PGP signature