Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 06:21:01 +0000 From: Murray Stokely <murray@FreeBSD.org> To: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org> Cc: doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: <section> vs. <sectN> Message-ID: <20040801062101.GF27954@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20040728230100.GE79225@abigail.blackend.org> References: <20040728205248.GI424@submonkey.net> <20040728230100.GE79225@abigail.blackend.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 01:01:00AM +0200, Marc Fonvieille wrote:
> > 2) <sect1>
> > <para>foo</para>
> > <sect2>
> > <para>bar</para>
> > </sect2>
> > </sect1>
> >
> [...]
>
> The 2nd one is maybe better when it comes to think about indentation
> levels. And when you are reading a large SGML file it can be useful to
> know "where" a section will be rendered, even if the indentation is not
> correct you know where you are, with 1st form it may be more difficult.
Yes I agree that the second is better. I have done my fair share of
moving around <sectN>s to different levels, and the effort in changing
two characters in that instance is well worth the enhanced readability
over just <section> tags.
- Murray
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040801062101.GF27954>