[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tags (searching)
- To: Greg Ferguson <>
- Subject: Re: Tags (searching)
- From: "der.hans" <>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 03:55:56 -0700 (MST)
- Cc: LDP <>
- Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:05:36 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-Message-ID: <4DpeN.A.MJB.Mu1S5@murphy>
Am 13. Jun, 2000 schwäzte Greg Ferguson so:
> What happens when a DocBook-tagged document is submitted that
> absolutely parses/build/validates 100% with the *standard* toolset,
> using the *standard* DocBook DTD, yet the LDP rejects it due to
> an additional tag or two that we don't want to have used?
> Does that make sense for the LDP? I don't believe so.
I don't either.
> - I agree with stating that deprecated tags should not be used.
A definite everyone seems to agree on.
> - I agree with *guiding* the author via templates and examples
> on how certain tags should be used/implemented. This can and
> should be made very clear.
This would be the *suggested* way of doing things. Some of the stuff need
to be required, e.g. author block to identify the author of the
document. We also need to start making sure the licences meet the LDP's
requirements. If they use the magic form we provide, auto checking can be
used. If they use something else, we need to verify manually. Maybe the
H-H should remind people that we aren't lawyers ( except David ;-), but
that we do try to make sure we have permission to redistribute, etc. Also
announcing that not including our *exactly worded* license will result in
slight delays until the license can be verified. This doesn't indicate
prejudice against other licenses, rather the inability to auto-parse
things that don't match a known standard. We could auto-parse for other
things such as a specific statement using the GPL as the license.
> - I agree with stating how/why certain tags should be *included*
> and for what purpose (ie searching). The author then is
> clued into the benefit of following the guidelines and template.
There should be lots of hints as to why following what the LDP recommends
makes life easier for the author :).
> - I am against proposing any sort of limiting tag set beyond
> the exclusion of deprecated tags. Let the DTD control that (and
> the display/presentation controlled via a DSSSL customization layer).
I'm also against that, but we need to remain open to limiting usage of
tags that we might determine to be a bad thing for this reason or
another. In such a case it would probably, but not definitely, be better
to move to docbook lite.
# der.hans@LuftHans.com home.pages.de/~lufthans/ www.Opnix.com
# Like the maid, I don't do (M$)Windows. - der.hans
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org