Your message dated Sun, 03 Aug 2008 11:18:00 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Re: Bug#396888: Can we please close this bug?
has caused the Debian Bug report #396888,
regarding dblatex cannot find or use DocBook standard character entities
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
immediately.)
--
396888: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=396888
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dblatex
Version: 0.1.10-1
Severity: important
*** Please type your report below this line ***
— is a standard character entity, long defined in DocBook:
$ grep -wi mdash /usr/share/xml/docbook/schema/dtd/4.4/ent/*
/usr/share/xml/docbook/schema/dtd/4.4/ent/ISOpub.ent:<!ENTITY mdash
"—"> <!-- EM DASH -->
See also:
http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/docbook.html
http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/ref-charents.html
http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/iso-pub.html
http://www.w3.org/2003/entities/iso8879doc/isopub.html
Same goes for é etc.
Yet dblatex seems to be unable to interpret those standard entities:
dblatex -b pdftex file.xml
/tmp/file.xml:36: parser error : Entity 'mdash' not defined
Is there a way to be able to use them? It's not always easy or
convenient to work in UTF-8; even Latin1 does not have some useful
character entities (—), and the Unicode numbers (—) are not
very intuitive...
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.16-2-k7
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Versions of packages dblatex depends on:
ii docbook-xml 4.4-5 standard XML documentation system,
ii file 4.17-4 Determines file type using "magic"
ii gs-esp [gs-pdfencrypt] 8.15.3.dfsg.1-1 The Ghostscript PostScript interpr
ii gs-gpl [gs-pdfencrypt] 8.54.dfsg.1-5 The GPL Ghostscript PostScript int
ii locales 2.3.6.ds1-4 GNU C Library: National Language (
ii tetex-extra 3.0.dfsg.3-1 Additional TeX input files of teTe
ii texlive-latex-extra 2005.dfsg.2-2 TeX Live: LaTeX supplementary pack
ii texlive-latex-recommende 2005.dfsg.2-3 TeX Live: LaTeX recommended packag
ii xsltproc 1.1.18-1 XSLT command line processor
dblatex recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
W. Martin Borgert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently it's "wontfix". However, I fail to see the use case.
> In the XML world, it's best practise to combine multiple files
> using XInclude and not old-style (SGML world) file entities.
> With DocBook, XInclude works phantastically well. So, why a wish
> for another method? Even "wishlist" should be reasonable :~)
>
> (Btw. using XML headers for all parts of a multi-file document
> is also useful, if you are using e.g. an XML-aware editor.
> Please try XInclude, you won't regret it!)
Agreed,
let's close it.
--
Andreas Hoenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPG: 1024D/B888D2CE
A4A6 E8B5 593A E89B 496B
82F0 728D 8B7E B888 D2CE
pgp7yFHuKMsXH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
