Re: RFI: debiandoc-sgml V2
Denis Barbier (barbier@linuxfr.org) wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 11:58:51PM -0700, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> [...]
> > 3. SGML normalization.
> >
> > Normalizing SGML code. For example, <p> ... -> <p> ... </p>.
>
> Agree, IMO Debiandoc DTD is too laxist; in order to ease writing parsing
> tools, it would really help if optional elements were avoided.
> When we discuss on debian-www how to generate XHTML pages, we found that
> those optional elements were confusing, e.g. one could want to replace
> <p>
> <ul>
> <li>foo
> <li>bar
> </ul>
> by
> <p>
> <ul>
> <li>foo
> <li>bar
> </ul>
> </p>
> whereas this is incorrect and must be written
> <p></p>
> <ul>
> <li>foo
> <li>bar
> </ul>
>
> So in this particular case, optional P end element is only useful to
> hide misused syntax.
Ok, so you're talking about the DTD.
> [...]
> > 6. I wish to have some translation framework implemented.
>
> Me too :)
>
> > Denis Barbier seems to be developing interesting tool but if it is
> > integrated into debiandoc-sgml, it shall be nicer.
>
> Such a translation framework should be discussed and documented before
> it is implemented in debiandoc-sgml; in fact this framework does
> certainly not depend upon source format, some general lines could
> be drawn.
I completely agree. When do we start?
> Here are some thoughts, we could discuss them and others on debian-i18n:
> * Translated text must be bound to original, i.e. anyone should
> be able by reading a translated file either to determine original
> file version (this option is used for our web pages) or to be
> informed that this translation is outdated (gettext PO files or
> Debconf templates files when translated and master templates
> are different files).
> * For large documents, tools should help tracking which parts are
> outdated. This implies that documents may be automatically split
> into small pieces (paragraphs, sections, ...). For instance, b-f
> installation manual mix marked sections, paragraphs, sections and
> optional elements which forbids such a split, so this document
> is not easily manageable. We have to find a solution which
> provides the same advantages without this drawback.
> * Tools should allow translators to add text.
> * Encoding must either be utf8 or defined in source file (this is
> for instance not the case with Debconf templates files and SGML
> documents AFAICT).
> * Source files should contain some informations on how to contact
> latest translator (as in PO file header). Date information could
> also be useful.
Very interesting points. These tools should become a layer around
DebianDoc. This is gonna be fun! :-)
Thanks,
Ardo
--
Ardo van Rangelrooij
home email: ardo@debian.org
home page: http://people.debian.org/~ardo
GnuPG fp: 3B 1F 21 72 00 5C 3A 73 7F 72 DF D9 90 78 47 F9
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: