At 10:39 AM 10/18/01 -0700, Eric Richardson wrote:
Yann Dirson wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 09:12:49AM -0700, Eric Richardson wrote:
I'm trying to include C source into docbook but I'm having problems with
the #include stdio.h. I really would like to have the source compile
as is and
-0700, M. Wroth wrote:
At 10:39 AM 10/18/01 -0700, Eric Richardson wrote:
Yann Dirson wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 09:12:49AM -0700, Eric Richardson wrote:
I'm trying to include C source into docbook but I'm having problems
with the #include stdio.h. I really would like to have the source
A very interesting approach. Thank you for posting the reference.
At 12:08 PM 10/19/01 +0800, Rafael 'Dido' Sevilla wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 08:43:14PM -0700, M. Wroth wrote:
Another approach is the literate programming one of having the DocBook
source write the C source when
/01 +0100, Dave Pawson wrote:
At 21:24 27/08/2001 -0700, M. Wroth wrote:
Most of the effort that used to be going into DSSSL now seems to be
directed towards XSL. This may be the wave of the future, but I
personally find it unfortunate. While (Open)Jade does not implement the
whole DSSSL standard
Most of the effort that used to be going into DSSSL now seems to be
directed towards XSL. This may be the wave of the future, but I personally
find it unfortunate. While (Open)Jade does not implement the whole DSSSL
standard, I still find it a more useful tool than any of the XML based
Hear, hear!
I'm not sure I want to claim to be either a writer or a programmer, but I
think Denis has put his finger on the key issue. None of the tools I've
seen do a good job of hiding the irrelevant (to the author) mechanics of
SGML/XML and the processing toolchain from the author.
By
At 04:17 PM 8/22/01 -0700, Tom Epperly wrote:
I am part of a project where were are able to start writing perhaps 200
pages of documentation. We were interested in using DocBook because it
seemed like an up and coming standard that could deliver the document in
several formats. We were
At 08:11 AM 8/22/01 -0500, Dennis Grace wrote:
Well, Holger, it may be just that some of us find emacs a clumsy,
cumbersome editor. If that sounds harsh, you should hear what some of the
other writers in my group have to say about emacs.
responding to Holger's comment
I'm wondering why noone
I personally like emacs + psgml. But that may not be the best choice for
your target audience. I knew Emacs before I ever heard of SGML/XML, so the
learning curve for the editor per sec was, shall we say, short. But Emacs
is not an easy editor to introduce to non-programmers.
At 11:12 PM
How handy. Thanks
At 04:16 PM 7/14/01 +0200, Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Dan York [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
H interesting command. Definitely looks like it could have helped
me. No, I didn't know about it. The only thing is that the one on my
system (Red Hat Linux 6.2) converts all
Since Dan had already taken care of tag case and attribute quoting, the
utility of sgmlnorm may not have
occurred to him; I have found it useful it dealing with various
normalization issues in the past.
At 09:49 AM 7/12/01 -0400, Dan York wrote:
Richard,
What is involved in converting from
In reply to my example of a non-DocBook example that behaves differently
than DocBook:
At 09:12 AM 5/9/01 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
/ M. Wroth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| Here is an example of content:
|
| pIt
is not permissible under the Society's rules to
| fimbriate a
chief. Laurel
I asked this question on the DSSSList, and Daniel Speck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] suggested that it may be as simple as setting
(declare-initial-value input-whitespace-treatment
'collapse)
While at this point in my education, this is a pure magic
incantation, it appears to work. I also note that this
Hmmm. The behavior I asked about was the normalization
(possibly not the right word) of spaces in element content
(specifically, although not limited to, para elements), in the
SGML version of DocBook processed with the Modular DSSSL Style
Sheets.
I observe that multiple whitespace characters
Norman asked, in reply to my question:
At 12:53 PM 5/8/01 -0400, you wrote:
/ M. Wroth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| Hmmm. The behavior I asked about was the
normalization (possibly
| not the right word) of spaces in element content
(specifically,
| although not limited to, para elements
Can someone give me a quick pointer to how the effect of taking an
arbitrary number of whitespace characters in the document and normalizing
them into a single space character is achieved? The specific example is
the treatment of whitespace in a para (and other) element in the DocBook
DTD
That did indeed solve the problem with the graphics. Thank you.
At 08:14 AM 4/27/01 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
/ M. Wroth [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| However, I would like the figures to be centered on the page, and they are
| showing up left-justified. What am I doing wrong
I don't know if this is a misunderstanding of the DTD, a problem with the
style sheets, or a failure on my part to correctly customize the style
sheets. I am including graphics as figures in DocBook (SGML) 4.1. An
example is:
figure id=fig04
titleAlternate form of a
In a pure Windows NT environment, the CVS page says
The second way is known as local or
non-client/server CVS. This lets you run CVS if you have only
Windows machines. However, due to issues (a) with local CVS on Windows,
and (b) with the suitability of Windows as a server operating system in
I have just finished building and doing preliminary testing on an SGML
DocBook-based literate programming extension. This system consists of a
DTD (an extension of DocBook 4.1) that implements literate programming
markup, and two DSSSL style specifications that implement the "weave" and
I have just finished building and doing preliminary testing on an SGML
DocBook-based literate programming extension. This system consists of a
DTD (an extension of DocBook 4.1) that implements literate programming
markup, and two DSSSL style specifications that implement the "weave" and
Nik Clayton wrote:
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2001 01:36:00 -0800 (PST)
To: Bob McIlvride [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: TeX capacity exceeded,
[I've lost who was talking to who here]
That sounds familiar. When processed, my book's 761 pages. The
conversion using regular TeX is fine,
22 matches
Mail list logo
