Submitted Document Bugid: 156771

Thomas Jones admin at buddhalinux.com
Wed May 4 19:25:00 UTC 2005


Karsten Wade wrote:

>
>dbgenent?
>
>Otherwise, yeah, I've seen the *.ent designation before, that makes
>sense.
>
>  
>
dbgenent refers to the docbook general entity module. normally ---
dbgenent.mod. But, the reason for the module extension is to modularize
all entities from within one file. And specific entities are then
subjected to categorization.

i.e. iso-amsa.ent, iso-amsb.ent, etc...

In all the higher-level drivers i've utilized before, the custom general
entities were called from a module file:
example.dbgenent.mod. Then this inclusion file calls the neccessary
entity declarations: category-project.ent using a parameter entity
declaration.

But this complexity is not found in fedora declarations. Is just *.ent good?

>>- if the "bluecurve" entity is accepted; does the <interfacedefinition/>
>>element suffice as the parent node with its expected context?
>>    
>>
>
>I don't see that element, do you mean <interfacename>?  Regardless, AIUI
>that is an interface for OO programming and not a user interface.  I
>would capitalize "Bluecurve" and leave it alone without a special tag,
>after all, it's just a name.
>
>  
>
OK ... sounds good.

>>- if the "rpm" entity is accepted; what is its legal status? registered
>>or trademark?
>>    
>>
>
>Not sure, but I think it's irrelevant.
>
>My understanding is that we may replace most of the legal trademark
>boilerplate with a line like this:
>
>"All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners."
>
>I'll hunt up a better sentence than that one.
>
>I had this confirmed from Red Hat legal last year.
>
>After you have properly attributed a trademark in the boilerplate, you
>can use the mark in the text without a (TM) or (R).  However, you -must-
>use the term properly, e.g.:
>
>Red Hat -not- RedHat
>FireWire -not- firewire
>RPM -not- rpm
>etc.
>
>This is a best effort thing, anyone who finds an improper spelling of a
>trademark should just file a bug report. :)
>
>
>  
>
I didn't realize fedora-docs had encompassing permissions. My bad. Guess
I should have done more research.
Better to be safe than sorry! :)

>  
>
>>- i neglected to utilize the common ISO entity declarations for
>>readability. New authors find it difficult to read if utilized; yet
>>translators probably need the ISO declarations. I prefer ISO --- but
>>then again i am weird. ;)
>>    
>>
>
>How about we do this in two passes?  Get all the details worked out,
>then consider ISO entity declarations.
>
>- Karsten
>  
>
Good idea.




More information about the docs mailing list