Re: Sect tags

[Ali Abdin <aliabdin aucegypt edu>]

> John Fleck <jfleck@inkstain.net> writes:
> 
> > I'll defer to those more expert than myself in the ways of docbook on
> > the merits of Karl's solution. Seems like a good technical approach,
> > though I agree with Ali that it has practical drawbacks.
> 
> I'll work out a more general solution.
> 
> > In the interim, however, I've gone through and fixed the sects so they
> > all have id's and put up a new set of both sgml and xmls (I broke 'em
> > up into two tarballs this time, one with xmls and one with matching
> > sgmls for comparison).
> 
> Thanks for this.  Your work is very welcome, of course.  Once I've my
> setup up and running, I'll try to check the fixed docs with `nsgmls'.
> 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- cut here -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 
> Thanks for considering my proposal.

I like your proposal - but I do not think this is my department :) I think
muet or dcm would be in a better position to tell you on wether something like
this is wanted or not.

(and _ALL_ sect tags need IDs, not just sect1)

Regards,
Ali