Re: DOCBOOK: Usage Question

2001-03-23 Thread Norman Walsh
/ Sabine Ocker - Sun Microsystems [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say: | Sun Microsystems has proposed a change to the Docbook DTD which would | allow additional material after the last step in a procedure. Specifically, | the writers have a need for a Titled Section within Procedure after any |

Re: DOCBOOK: Including a DocBook document in a DocBook document

2001-03-23 Thread Tim Waugh
--FhKpTYimqQF2+bfE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 04:37:19PM +0100, Rune Enggaard Jensen wrote: Is there any way we can get this to work? Yes, but it takes some doing. See

Re: DOCBOOK: objection to docbook.dcl

2001-03-23 Thread Tony Graham - Sun Ireland - Staff Engineer
!-- Resent because the first try didn't get through -- Adam Di Carlo wrote at 21 Mar 2001 -0500: Shipped with the DocBook DTDs from 2.4.1 and up is 'docbook.dcl', an SGML declaration for use with DocBook documents. However, this declartion is unnecessarily restrictive, to the level where

Re: DOCBOOK: Representing CDATA sections

2001-03-23 Thread Ian Atkin
have you looked at the Text Layout tab for programlisting on Tools|Customisations? XMetal applies whiteshapce handling rules each time you save, switch from tags on to source view etc. set the programlisting Text Layout options to "preserve space" and XMetaL will stop mangling your whitespace

Re: DOCBOOK: diff document for 4.1 to 5.0alpha1 changes

2001-03-23 Thread Michael Smith
Norman Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: / Michael Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say: | A diff document showing the changes between the V4.1 XML DTD and | 5.0alpha1 is at: | | http://www.logopoeia.com/xml/db41to50a1-diff.txt | | Generated used the dtddiff utility from Earl Hood's

DOCBOOK: epcEdit and SGML docbook errors

2001-03-23 Thread GCS
Hello, Any of you can help me out with the errors: cannot generate system indentifier for public text "-//OASIS//ENTITIES DocBook Notations V4.1//EN" reference to entity "dbnotn" for which no system indentifier could be generated ... Thanks, Laszlo

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: objection to docbook.dcl

2001-03-23 Thread Adam Di Carlo
Karl Eichwalder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes -- I'm not against a declaratation. I'm just against a declaration which is unnecessarily restrictive, with the consequence that a non-trival number (perhaps 30%? more?) of the docbook SGML