Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Simplfying the ToC content model

[Brian Lalonde <brianiacus@yahoo.com>]

How about "This is only for the unusual case where you want to maintain 
the TOC by hand, AND need the elements pre-numbered for some reason."

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gerrit Kuilder" <gerrit@yours-untildeath.demon.nl>
To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net>; "Bob Stayton" <bobs@caldera.com>; "docbook" <docbook@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 12:55 AM
Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: Simplfying the ToC content model


> HEllo All,
> 
> Norman Walsh wrote:
> 
> > / Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> was heard to say:
> > | That puts the burden on the user to verify manually that the nesting is
> > | correct.  Wasn't that what DTD's were supposed to provide?  ISTM that
> > 
> > This is only for the unusual case where you want to maintain the TOC
> > by hand.
> > 
> >                                         Be seeing you,
> >                                           norm
> 
> 
> Peter makea a good point, and I am not quite sure how unusual it is to 
> maintain or recreate the toc 'by hand' (or script/xsl). With the nested 
> toc and with the proper class there is always this nagging feeling that 
> the toc could be incorrect.
> 
> 
> And how unuasual is the 'manual' maintance of the toc? There must be 
> quite few companies/people using the docbook outside the docbook/dssl/fo 
>   setup who need to generate the toc one way or another.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Gerrit
> 
> 
>