Em Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:56:04 +0900 Jonathan Corbet <cor...@lwn.net> escreveu:
> On Thu, 28 May 2015 18:49:07 -0300 > Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@osg.samsung.com> wrote: > > > Currently, it is using 'role="tt"', but this is not defined at > > the DocBook 4.5 spec. The net result is that no emphasis happens. > > > > So, replace them to bold emphasis. > > Nit: I suspect the intent of the "emphasis" here was to get the code in a > monospace font, which "bold" is unlikely to do. Isn't there a > role="code" or something useful like that to use? I'd have to go look. Good point! I think that emphasis only does italic (with is the default, and don't need role option) or bold on DocBook 4.5. We're using <constant> on the places where we want a monospace font. That's probably the right tag there. For the record: this document was produced by merging two different documents: the V4L docbook (that used a legacy DocBook version - 3.x or 2.x) and the DVB LaTex documentation, which was converted by some tool to docbook 3.x (or 2.x) to match the same DocBook spec that V4L were using. The 'role="tt"' came from such conversion. This were maintained together with the legacy Mercurial tree that was used to contain the media drivers. When we moved to git, the DocBook got merged in the Kernel and another conversion was taken to allow compiling it using DocBook 4.x. We only checked the tags that didn't compile, but options with invalid arguments like 'role="tt"' where xmllint doesn't complain weren't touched. One question: any plans to update the documentation to DocBook schema? We're using either schema 4.1 or 4.2, with are both very old. The latest 4.x is 4.5, with was written back on 2006. So, except for historic reasons, are there any reason why keeping them at version 4.2? I did a quick look at the DocBook specs (for 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5), and they say that no backward compatible changes were done. So, using version 4.5 should be straightforward. I applied this patch here: --- a/Documentation/DocBook/media_api.tmpl +++ b/Documentation/DocBook/media_api.tmpl @@ -2,2 +2,2 @@ -<!DOCTYPE book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.2//EN" - "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.2/docbookx.dtd"; [ +<!DOCTYPE book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.5//EN" + "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.5/docbookx.dtd"; [ and compiled the media documentation with: make cleanmediadocs make DOCBOOKS=media_api.xml htmldocs 2>&1 | grep -v "element.*: validity error : ID .* already defined" xmllint --noent --postvalid "$PWD/Documentation/DocBook/media_api.xml" >/tmp/x.xml 2>/dev/null xmllint --noent --postvalid --noout /tmp/x.xml xmlto html-nochunks -m ./Documentation/DocBook/stylesheet.xsl -o Documentation/DocBook/media Documentation/DocBook/media_api.xml >/dev/null 2>&1 In order to try to produce errors. Everything seemed to work. On a quick look, the documentation looked fine, and no errors (except for some crappy element validity errors, with seems to be due to a bug on recent versions of the xml tools present on Fedora 22). Maybe 5.x would provide nicer documents, but converting to it doesn't seem too easy, although there are some semi-auto way of doing it, at least according with: http://doccookbook.sourceforge.net/html/en/dbc.structure.db4-to-db5.html Not sure if worth the efforts to convert to 5.x. Regards, Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
