Re: A thought:

[Ali Abdin <aliabdin aucegypt edu>]

* David C. Mason (dcm redhat com) wrote at 01:12 on 28/11/00:
> Dan Mueth <d-mueth uchicago edu> writes:
> 
> > Another solution would be to say very little in this section and
> > then ulink to a seperate document which has all the real content
> > (say "Reporting Bugs in GNOME".)  The help browser will know how to
> > find this document so we don't have the problem we had with making
> > it an entity.  This is the simplest solution which comes to mind,
> > aside from just leaving the text in the template.
> 
> 
> I think you nailed it here. Let the user's *tool* take care of the
> problem. This at least takes a level of complexity out of the hands of
> someone who may be new to SGML, new to DocBook, and new to
> GNOME... but still a valued and valuable writer. Lets explore this
> with the 'help browser team'... is there a team? :)

There is me, and John Fleck really.

I've never written a doc in my life (just modified a doc that telsa wrote for
me)...

But from my perspective, we should _ONLY_ use DocBook XML. No customizations.

The whole /reason/ we created the custom GNOME DTD was just to support PNG
screenshots, and now its in DocBook XML. So there is no "real" justification
for a custom DTD.

Also, if we just use DocBook XML then gnome-db2html2 can be /consistent/ (i.e.
we can pretty much gurantee it works for all/most DocBook docs, instead of
just "GNOME" specific ones). Right now this isn't much of a difference since
there isn't much of a modification in the GNOME DTD.

Somebody could use Karl's suggestion (from previous threads) of using
'sgmlnorm' - or you could add your own "custom" entity to the doc for bug
reporting (or you could create a whole "appendix" on "proper" bug reporting
and install that with gnome-core).

Regards,
Ali