Re: Gnome-App Template Proposed Updates

[Karl Eichwalder <keichwa gmx net>]

Eliot Landrum <eliot@landrum.cx> writes:

> I disagree. It works perfectly in practice. I've used it in numerous
> documents with no difficulties. Having the filenames match sections
> allows you to quickly find the file that needs changing because it
> matches an exisiting scheme.

Yes, might work for application manuals.

> > I like RefTeX's (reftex.el)
> > approach most: just use a prefix and a number for all labels.  What's
> > needed is a ID server where writers can "acquire" IDs.

> This violates the entire idea of DocBook -- dynamic content. I'd hate
> to get stuck with all my figure id's being numbered 1-5 and then I
> stick a new one in at place 4 which shifts old 4 and 5 to 5 and
> 6. Having names that match content and sections allows
> modification/additions to the figures/sections with no problems.

Oops, sorry, misunderstanding.  I wanted to say: all the time just use
the next number, don't care whether they will appear in sequence inside
your document.  The software will take take to show the right
things[tm].  Names are always to short or to specific or your co-worker
uses to think different...

> Well, hopefully the person writing the document would update the
> comments. You seem to think manual authors are lazy bums. Maybe we all
> are...

Duplicating contents (e.g., header lines == comments) is asking for
trouble in the long run.  But if an authors needs those decorations he
should use them, of course.

> I'll keep ticking away with my style.

That's good :)

-- 
work : ke@suse.de                          |          ------    ,__o
     : http://www.suse.de/~ke/             |         ------   _-\_<,
home : keichwa@gmx.net                     |        ------   (*)/'(*)