Re: doc-base 0.4 and other issues
Hi,
>>"Marco" == Marco Budde <Marco.Budde@hqsys.antar.com> writes:
Marco> Am 16.04.98 schrieb apharris # burrito.onshore.com ...
Marco> Moin Adam!
APH> We have two major policy issues to solve immediately (although it
APH> is
Marco> Why? We#re talking about Debian 2.1 and not about hamm!
So? Why should we dawdle?
APH> documents explaining these two issues right now. As the doc-base
APH> maintainer, I shall take it upon myself to formulate the document
APH> (a), unless anyone has a valid objection to that. BTW I'm going
APH> to make it
Marco> You can not create a document, because we haven#t defined the
Marco> standards. But if we have done it, it would be nice.
Do you even look at what people say before flaming them? Or do
you want to stay here forever talking about nothing? Do you have any
idea how standards bodies reach a consensus? Are you just intent on
wasting everybodies time?
APH> a separate SGML document, fold it out of the doc-base (but
APH> include it, isn't SUBDOC wonderful?).
Marco> No, I would suggest docreg.
What does that mean? Do you know what SUBDOC means in this
context?
APH> With respect to the proposed document heirarchy, I agree with
APH> Manoj in that the document should be more of an index than a
APH> table of contents. Furthermore, as an index, we need to allow
APH> crosslinking, in other
Marco> Please stopp this discussion. Keep it simple and let us start
Marco> with the structure itself.
Again, you ask a discussion (which you are loosing) to be
stopped, and ask us to rush willy nilly into defining a
structure before we define the governing meta rule about the
structure. Wonderful.
manoj
--
If at first you don't succeed, transform your data set.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: