Subject: Re: [docbook] Re: refentry and biblioentry
Sam Steingold <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > * In message <email@example.com> > > * On the subject of "Re: refentry and biblioentry" > > * Sent on Fri, 23 May 2003 17:19:44 -0400 > > * Honorable Norman Walsh <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > > > / Sam Steingold <email@example.com> was heard to say: > > | bibliography is allowed in appendix, article, book, chapter, glossary, > > | part, preface, sect1, sect2, sect3, sect4, sect5, section, > > | but not refsection! > > > > File an RFE. I can't think of any good reason not to allow bibliographies > > in refsections. > > <https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=742624&group_id=21935&atid=373750> > When can I expect an action? Note that the URL above isn't valid any longer because your request was filed as a feature request instead of a DocBook DTD RFE (see the note at the end of this message). I moved it to the RFE tracker, so it's now at the following URL - http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=742624&group_id=21935&atid=384107 Also, note that this RFE (#742624) is actually a duplicate of an existing RFE, #435518 - http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=21935&atid=384107&func=detail&aid=435518 It looks like that RFE was closed over a year ago without any change being made to the DTD. The last part of the comment attached to it says: Norm suggests that BiblioList could be added, parallel to GlossList, which would allow authors to create a RefSect1 that effectively contains a bibliography. Proposed: consensus is not forming. Post to DocBook list and ask them. But it doesn't look like any significant response ever came back from the list about it. The last mention of that RFE in the TC records is in the minutes for the November 2001 meeting. Note that we also have an open RFE requesting that Bibliography be allowed in Refentry. See RFE 686733 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=686733&group_id=21935&atid=384107 and see the meeting minutes from April - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook/200304/msg00053.html It looks like that one remains open pending feedback from Dennis Evans. Regarding when you can expect action: In general, when a new RFE is opened, it goes onto the agenda for the next monthly DocBook technical committee telcon (in this case, June 17) and is discussed on the telcon that month only if the TC can manage to get through all the other agenda items and existing open RFEs. If there isn't enough time to get to it during that month, it gets discussed on the next monthly telcon. --Mike Note about Sourceforge "trackers" - We have separate "Feature Request" and "DocBook RFE" Sourceforge trackers. The Feature Request tracker is one of the default SF trackers for every project, and its name and description are hard-coded into the SF interface and can't be changed; so at the top lever of the interface, we don't have a good way to make it clear that that the Feature Request tracker is only for stylesheet feature requests, not DocBook DTD enhancement requests. (And the SF interface further complicates things by having a hard-coded "RFE" link that takes you to the Feature Request tracker, not the RFE tracker.) Anyway, in the form for submitting feature requests, I've now added an admonition pointing out that DocBook DTD RFEs should be submitted through the other tracker.