Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 08:06:09 +0200 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> Cc: doc@freebsd.org, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Upgrading to DocBook 5.0 Message-ID: <CAF6rxgkCVbAeFhDAgdnnpkXPUO88pczNhn=fmDPSFRBUQCZ1-Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1305281820360.49386@wonkity.com> References: <519FA4FE.4030305@FreeBSD.org> <51A51C40.1030205@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1305281820360.49386@wonkity.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29 May 2013 02:24, Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> wrote: > On Tue, 28 May 2013, Gabor Kovesdan wrote: > >> I have a patch to preview how it would look like: >> http://kovesdan.org/patches/fbsd-docbook5.diff >> >> Please comment on this. It is very important to discuss this kind of >> changes. > > > I think that keeping up with DocBook versions is important. > > Leaving out the systemitem class simplifies markup. One nice thing about > those classes is that they remove ambiguity during editing. Without them, it > may be difficult to tell from context whether a systemitem is a username or > a directory name, for example. Although if that is not clear from context, > it suggests the text needs improvement. Agreed. Unless the class could be used to provide additional formatting options I don't see the need for it here. It provides semantic value, but I don't think much is gained from that here. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgkCVbAeFhDAgdnnpkXPUO88pczNhn=fmDPSFRBUQCZ1-Q>