You may want to reduce the mono font size about a point or two and see if that
helps.
0.60em
You may need to read up on this in the docs.
In a message dated 08/15/10 15:21:16 Pacific Daylight Time, ste...@caringo.com
writes:
didn't make the error go away. Possibly the only way to
do that is t
didn't make the error go away. Possibly the only way to
do that is to edit the lines to make them shorter which is not
maintainable for code samples.
On 8/15/2010 4:31 PM, DeanNelson wrote:
Steve,
I get these all the time. It is a warning that FOP has overflowed an
area with text. I usually g
On Sunday, August 15, 2010 02:35:42 pm Jirka Kosek wrote:
> > structure
> > navigation
>
> These elements are not supported in IE6/7 and they can't be CSS styled
> there without using supplement Javascript library.
So? That doesn't mean they are valueless. There's nothing wrong with using
tho
Steve,
I get these all the time. It is a warning that FOP has overflowed an area with
text. I usually get them when a cell in a table is too small for the data. FOP
still prints it, but complains, and if it is really tight it will bleed into
the next cell.
I think "mpt" is milli-points.
Usual
Steve Johnson wrote:
> I want to reduce the spacing between paragraphs, so I tried this in the
> customization layer and it had no effect:
>
> 50em
>
> I have also tried:
>
>
>
>
>
> and space-before have no effect.
>
>
> What am I doing wrong?
Well, I don't know where you have found para
Hi Steve,
In XSL you declare a parameter or attribute set and then refer to it by name. You
have done the first step which is to declare them. Since these names you have used
are not in the DocBook stylesheet, they will not be referred to and so they are not
used. If you want to override the
When doing FOP, I get
WARNING: Line 1 of a paragraph overflows the available area by 12000mpt.
What is "mpt"?
It's happening in a code example with a line length that is not terribly
long. A snip of the XML follows but my question is, how to avoid these
errors? In some documents the errors ta
> Until "the other day" I processed my DocBook Slides documents with
> docbook-slides-3.4.0/xsl/html/frames.xsl
> Now I started attempting to process them using these stylesheets:
> /usr/share/xml/docbook/stylesheet/nwalsh5/1.75.1/slides/html/frames.xsl
> (Although ... the numbering scheme
Dave Pawson wrote:
> I'm curious why you are so anti?
I'm not anti, I'm trying to be pragmatic. And I don't see what
advantages can bring HTML5 output generated from DocBook to end users.
> Would you argue against all its features:
> A11y
Do you have idea how and when DocBook markup should be
I want to reduce the spacing between paragraphs, so I tried this in the
customization layer and it had no effect:
50em
I have also tried:
and space-before have no effect.
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks
--
Steve Johnson, Senior Content Developer
Caringo
ste...@caringo.com
> Bob Stayton writes:
> Hi,
> I'm not quite clear what the question is here,
> but I think you are asking
> how to migrate a customization layer that was for the
> non-namespaced stylesheets to one that could be used with the
> namespaced stylesheets.
Actually: no.
I am sorry, should th
> Bob Stayton writes:
> When I go to the W3C website, I see that HTML5 is only in the stage of
> "W3C Working Draft" as of 24 June 2010. If we are going to implement
> support for HTML5, it should be on an experimental level, no?
Right, but already for that working draft there ar
Hi,
I'm not quite clear what the question is here, but I think you are asking how to
migrate a customization layer that was for the non-namespaced stylesheets to one that
could be used with the namespaced stylesheets. If so, then you should just be able to
add the docbook namespace declaration
When I go to the W3C website, I see that HTML5 is only in the stage of "W3C Working
Draft" as of 24 June 2010. If we are going to implement support for HTML5, it should
be on an experimental level, no?
Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
b...@sagehill.net
---
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 19:19:09 +0200
Jirka Kosek wrote:
> Jochen Hayek wrote:
>
> > How "many" new features of HTML5 "our DocBook" might even make use
> > of, mentioning HTML5 *is* a *factor*. You should be aware of that.
>
> No offense, but I suggest you to study HTML5 and its support in
> web-b
Jochen Hayek wrote:
> How "many" new features of HTML5 "our DocBook" might even make use of,
> mentioning HTML5 *is* a *factor*.
> You should be aware of that.
No offense, but I suggest you to study HTML5 and its support in
web-browsers more thoroughly first. If after that you can suggest ways
i
Jochen Hayek wrote:
> We all appreciate your technical expertise,
> but from a marketing point of view,
> it's one of the biggest mistakes you or the DocBook community could make,
> if you said: we ignore HTML5.
Well, if anyone thinks that there is some advantage of producing HTML5
output from Do
It's preparing me quite some grief,
if you have a look at the "mother article" of this one here.
Jochen, the rough+rude Hun
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-apps-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
> Robert Lucente writes:
>> from a marketing point of view
> I am not sure what the "correct answer" is; however, lets ask
> Who is the intended audiance / market of DocBook ?
Dear Gurus,
dear inclined audience!
Pls!!
Don't be shy and don't be overly modest!
There is not only DocBook ou
>from a marketing point of view
I am not sure what the "correct answer" is; however, lets ask
Who is the intended audiance / market of DocBook ?
-Original Message-
From: Jochen Hayek [mailto:jochen+oasis-o...@hayek.name]
Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2010 12:10 PM
To: docbook-apps@lists.oasi
> Jirka Kosek writes:
> Dave Pawson wrote:
>> Structural markup would better match docbook semantics.
> You mean those new elements which are not working in IE6 & IE7?
> http://blog.whatwg.org/supporting-new-elements-in-ie
>> Generally a move forward from html 4.
> From markup point of vi
Dave Pawson wrote:
> Structural markup would better match docbook semantics.
You mean those new elements which are not working in IE6 & IE7?
http://blog.whatwg.org/supporting-new-elements-in-ie
> Generally a move forward from html 4.
From markup point of view HTML5 is a mess. No grammar, no sc
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:46:30 +0200
Jirka Kosek wrote:
> Dave Pawson wrote:
>
> > Reading http://diveintohtml5.org/ and wondering if people think it
> > would make a good target for docbook?
> > Possibly as a replacement for html, more likely as a choice?
>
> What would be advantages of produci
23 matches
Mail list logo
