Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 15:35:55 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Cc: doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: <section> vs. <sectN> Message-ID: <200407301535.55709.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20040730141505.GV424@submonkey.net> References: <20040728205248.GI424@submonkey.net> <20040730141505.GV424@submonkey.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 30 July 2004 10:15 am, Ceri Davies wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 09:52:48PM +0100, Ceri Davies wrote: > > Which of these do we prefer? > > > > 1) <section> > > <para>foo</para> > > <section> > > <para>bar</para> > > </section> > > </section> > > > > 2) <sect1> > > <para>foo</para> > > <sect2> > > <para>bar</para> > > </sect2> > > </sect1> > > > > This is basically a style issue, as DocBook does the same for both, so > > whatever the outcome it should probably be added to the FDP. > > > > I'll note here that nearly all of our documents use #2 already; I am > > working on one of the ones that doesn't. > > I sense a lack of consensus, so I won't change this particular document. > Thanks all, ?? It seems that the consensus is for 2). The only person in favor of 1) is DES on the basis that <sectX> is deprecated. A quick check to see if it is indeed deprecated or not should be sufficient to clear this up. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200407301535.55709.jhb>