On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 07:45 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
<stickster> I am still curious... why did we move to XInclude
to start
with?
Here's my small stack of reasons:
[...snip...]
Thanks, good for future reference too.
Also, I'm wondering if this header is properly formed:
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook V4.4//EN"
"http://www.docbook.org/xml/4.4/docbookx.dtd">
Shouldn't there be an 'XML' between 'DocBook' and 'V4.4'?
Just so. I went ahead and committed this just now since I didn't see
any such changes upon updating.
I'm going to check all these changes in for now, so that we can
work
together to hack through. My error output seems related to the $PWD of
the XIncluded file. I'm working my way through until I probably end up
with just having all the legal notice stuff within the language-specific
areas of the module as a hack-around.
I had a thought about this... Why not include the actual <para> elements
in extended entities, and then XInclude either a <section> or
<legalnotice> element that wraps the extended entity? That way we can
put a standard DocBook XML prolog in all docs and go with XInclude in
the generated fdp-info-*.xml document. I haven't tried this but I'll
meet you on IRC today to discuss.
--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE
http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Documentation Project:
http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/