This is the mail archive of the docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org mailing list .
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Bob Stayton <bobs@sagehill.net> writes: > I objected to changing the version of the DTD when in fact the DTD had not > changed. It is misleading, and forces people to validate their files to see > if they still work. And to get them to validate, every webpage file's > DOCTYPE in a collection has to be updated for the new DTD version number. > Webpage sites can have hundreds of files. If the DTD has not changed, that > is wasted busy work since it has no benefit. Perhaps the next Website > release should go to 3.* and leave the DTDs behind, so that the version > numbers no longer have the appearance of being in synch. Here's an idea: Maybe we could integrate the Website stylesheets-- and Slides stylesheets, while we're at it -- into the standard DocBook XSL Stylesheets distribution. That is, just make them a part of the standard docbook-xsl releases. The Website and Slides releases would then become DTD/schema-only packages and we wouldn't need to deal with the versioning anomaly. Yeah, I recognize that Website and Slides doc instances contain elements that aren't part of standard DocBook and that the existing docbook-xsl stylesheets currently only transform standard DocBook doc instances. But that doesn't mean they need to stay that way forever. --Mike
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |