Re: Comments on Docs

On Sat, 2 Sep 2000, Ali Abdin wrote:

> * Alexander Kirillov ( wrote at 16:40 on 02/09/00:
> > On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 03:11:32PM -0200, Ali Abdin wrote:
> > > 
> > > Also - in the gnome-app-template file you have a <sect1 id="license"> that
> > > states the license of the documentation - Is this the GDP way of adding
> > > licenses to docs, or are we supposed to just have legalnotice (if the former,
> > > I don't really need to change gnome-db2html2, but if the latter then I need to
> > > modify gnome-db2html2 and somebody needs to modify the gnome-app-template
> > > file)
> > 
> > Ali: section "license" desribes licensing of the *application*, not
> > documentation; it has nothing to do with copyright on docs. License
> > for docs should be stated in <legalnotice> - look closer at the
> > template. 
> Ahhhhhh! DOH - I should've guessed. Still - the only 'logical' way for me to
> get the license is to pretend it has its own id (that people will agree not to
> use in their docs). Is it okay to use say 'legalnotice' (i.e. gnome-db2html2
> /path/to/file.sgml?legalnotice)

We should use 'ln7'. db2html generally names each html file after the
id.  For the legalnotice, which does not have an id, it uses the filename
'ln7.html', as if it had the id="ln7".

Generally, I think we should try to keep things as similar to db2html with
the gdp-both.dsl stylesheets as possible, unless we have a very good
reason not to.  This will prevent odd problems from creeping in and will
help us out with integrating Dewey since Dewey's targets must work for
both db2html and gnome-db2html2.  Thus, naming targets which do not have
an explicit id should be done in a similar way to db2html.


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