[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: DocBook filename extension
>What is the official DocBook filename extension (assuming there is >one)? I've seen .docb, .dbx, and .xml. > >Just curious. > >-Brian I use '*.xdbk'. I don't understand why people use '*.xml', since it's not just XML - you can be far more specific than that. I regard that as somewhat like naming files containing C code as '*.txt', since they are technically text files (well yeah... but OF COURSE they're text files!). Maybe one reason I'm so keen to distinguish XML DocBook from other types of XML files is that I have pattern rules, in my makefiles, for processing them, as well as files of other XML-based formats. Perhaps a standardized DocBook filename extension isn't so important, since people don't often use it as a distribution format, though. What I'd like to know is what people use for external parsed entity filename conventions. I use '*.xdbk.ent', since they are external parsed entities that tend to be fairly specific to XML DocBook. For external parameter entities, I generally use '*_xdbk.dtd', since a DTD fragment is theoretically usable as a stand-alone DTD (unlike external parsed entities, which don't have to meet criteria as stringent as well-formed XML files), and are more reusable from DTDs for another vocabulary, but tend to specific to XML DocBook, in some way. I regard external parameter entities in much the same way as I view C header files - the extension declares the format and usage model, but not the usage semantics. Anyway, I'd be glad to hear others' thoughts on the topic. Matt Gruenke _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC