[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debiandoc to docbook conversion situation review

Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> writes:

> I was also checking Debiandoc2docbookxml and it seems to convert:
>             Concersion result of     font used in  : SGML tag used in
> debiandoc   Debiandoc2docbookxml   : debiandoc     : Junichi's document
> package   -> application           : TT            : productname

I don't like either alternative here.  IMHO the right thing
<systemitem role="package">.

> file      -> application           : TT            : filename

Cleaerly should be filename.  Perhaps if it has a trailing slash,
should be <filename class="directory"> ?

> prgn      -> application           : TT            : command

<command> is the right thing here.

> tt        -> application           : TT            : type

Both are wrong, IMHO; use <token> or <literal>.

> var       -> application           : italics       : parameter

<replacable> is the right tag.

> example   -> literallayout         : TT            : screen

Hmm.  Good one.  I'd have to play with it.  Both might be right for
some situations.

> strong    -> emphasis
> em        -> emphasis              : --            : emphasis

I think <emphasis> is right for both.

> heading   ->                         (larger)      : title

Doesn't this get moved in Debiandoc2docbookxml to sectional titles?

Philippe, can you make this so?  Or do you have objections to how I
laid it out?
> I think everyone to agree on these tag use is very important at this
> stage.  Current Debiandoc2docbookxml template may need some tweaking
> before using it to bulk of debiandoc documentation.  Current situation
> lose many details while it may print OK.

Yes, it is essential to get this right.

Can we make these changes and do a more full review (including making
sure that <ref>, <qref>, and in fact all tags map out properly).

...Adam Di Carlo..<adam@onshore-devel.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>

Reply to: