[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: DOCBOOK: [Frederik Fouvry <fouvry@sfs.nphil.uni-tuebingen.de>] A DocBook problem
- From: Frederik Fouvry <fouvry@sfs.nphil.uni-tuebingen.de>
- To: nw@nwalsh.com
- Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 13:10:11 +0100 (MET)
(Feel free to forward this message to a more appropriate address) Hello, Is there any reason for treating qandaset differently from chunking section elements? We have made ID elements compulsory for chunk elements, since some people were violently opposed against the names generated by the style sheets. To keep a fairly large FAQ manageable in HTML, I changed qandadiv and qandaset into chunking elements as well, and I then found that it is not possible to enforce an id attribute without changing the docbook files (QandA is located before the redeclaration placeholder). Hence the (admittedly somewhat inaccurate) question at the beginning of the paragraph ... And are language codes more or less free, or is the syntax of RFC1766 recommended (Unix used pt_BR, RFC1766 says pt-BR)? Just wondering if 'Docbook' had an opinion about it. Thanks, Frederik Fouvry KDE DocBook Team
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC