Re: Compiling docbook packages

[Norman Walsh <ndw nwalsh com>]

/ Ronald de Man <deman@win.tue.nl> was heard to say:
| On Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 06:41:18AM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
| > | I got it somewhat working now, but it breaks everytime there
| > | are unmatched tags in the sgml files from gnome. And there are a 
| > | lot of those unmatched tags.
| > | 
| > | Does anyone know more about these unmatched tags? Is that normal??
| > 
| > Can you post or send me an example of the unmatched tags in question?
[...]
| jade:../functions.sgml:276:11:E: document type does not allow element "REFENTRY" here
[...]
| and when I look at line 276 I get the strong feeling that closing tags
| </refsect1></refentry> are missing:

Yes, I see the problem. In order to parse this document, you'll have to use
an alternate SGML declaration. You can do this by passing it to Jade
immediately before your document.  So, if you're running

  jade <options> foo.sgm

run 

  jade <options> mydecl.dcl foo.sgm

instead.

The declaration you want is a copy of the DocBook declaration, with the
following change:

                  OMITTAG  YES

instead of OMITTAG NO down near the bottom.

| Maybe I've misinstalled something causes my docbook installation to
| be more picky than necessary. After all, it is recognized that
| <refentry> is not legal at those places, and the only way to make
| sense of it is by closing the open tags. But are mismatched tags
| really normal?

If you say OMITTAG YES, they are ;-)

                                        Cheers,
                                          norm
-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Every new beginning comes from
http://nwalsh.com/                 | some other beginning's end.