Re: Can identifier url="foo" be duplicated?
- From: Dan Mueth <muet alumni uchicago edu>
- To: David Merrill <david lupercalia net>
- Cc: gnome-doc-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Can identifier url="foo" be duplicated?
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:55:55 -0500 (CDT)
I will try to answer some of these questions with a perspective of what
ScrollKeeper was intended to allow, although I haven't written most of
the OMF files in question.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, David Merrill wrote:
> Lampadas has a unique key on filename, so only a single document can point
> at the same file. So, I am catching all of these as I try to import your
> data.
>
> I'm running into situations where more than one omf file is pointing to
> the same source file. I reported the first one as a bug, since a Spanish
> omf file was pointing to an English source, but now I'm running into
> three omf files which all point to the same document, but use different
> subjects/categories. I wonder if you are using multiple omf files to get
> multiple category entries. Is this what you're doing?
One can specify multiple categories for a document within a single OMF
file (or more technically, a single <resource> in an OMF file).
Having said that, I was initially a proponent of having ScrollKeeper key
on the full URL to a file (eg:
file://usr/share/gnome/help/gpl/C/gpl.sgml). A couple prominent hackers
convinced me not to do so. Instead, ScrollKeeper just numbers the OMF
resources (ie. <resource>) as they are registered and keys off of that.
This allows multiple OMF files or resources to refer to the same document
if they choose. In principle, it allows a single OMF resource to point to
multiple possible locations of the document. This isn't too useful right
now, but if ScrollKeeper grows to be network-enabled, it would be useful
to point to multiple copies at different places on the Net (ie. document
URL fallback).
> Also, are you sharing files as entities among multiple documents? If so, I
> will have to remove the unique index and check for duplicates only among
> "top" files.
This is a useful thing to be able to do and we've discussed it on a number
of occassions. I'm not sure if we are doing it right now.
> I hope I am not being a pest asking all of these questions and needing
> some hand-holding. I do appreciate your help very much.
Not at all :)
-Dan
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]